Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
AGENDA - General Committee - 20170404
General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 7 p.m. Council Chambers Aurora Town Hall Public Release March 24, 2017 Town of Aurora General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 7 p.m., Council Chambers Councillor Gaertner in the Chair 1. Approval of the Agenda Recommended: That the agenda as circulated by Legislative Services be approved. 2. Declarations of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof 3. Presentations (a) Anca Mihail, Manager, Engineering and Capital Delivery Re: Item R1 – IES17-015 – Ten-Year Capital Road Reconstruction Program (b) Dan Elliott, Director of Financial Services - Treasurer Re: Item R2 – FS17-003 – Joint Operations Centre (JOC) Project: Financial Summary Report 4. Delegations 5. Consent Agenda General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Page 2 of 7 Items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered routine or no longer require further discussion, and are enacted in one motion. The exception to this rule is that a Member may request for one or more items to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion and action. Recommended: That the following Consent Agenda Items, C1 to C5 inclusive, be approved: C1. IES17-014 – Submission of Annual Drinking Water Quality Report (Information Report dated March 21, 2017, included on agenda per Member of Council request) Recommended: 1. That Report No. IES17-014 be received for information. C2. IES17-016 – Award of Tender IES 2016-103 – Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Sewer Inspection Services Recommended: 1. That Report No. IES17-016 be received; and 2. That Tender No. IES 2016-103 for Capital Project No. 41011 – Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Sewer Inspection Services for sewer inspection services at various locations in the Town of Aurora for one (1) Year (with an option to renew for an additional two (2) one (1) year periods), be awarded to Infrastructure Intelligence Services Inc. in the amount of $134,460 excluding taxes; and 3. That the Director of Infrastructure and Environmental Services be authorized to renew Tender IES 2016-103 for an additional two (2), one (1) year periods, pending an annual analysis and satisfactory performance review by the Director; and 4. That the Mayor and Town Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary Agreement, including any and all documents and ancillary agreements required to give effect to same. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Page 3 of 7 C3. IES17-017 – Award of Tender 2017-26-IES – For the Reconstruction of Brookland Avenue from Yonge Street to Banbury Court Recommended: 1. That Report No. IES17-017 be received; and 2. That Tender No. 2017-26-IES for the reconstruction of Brookland Avenue, from Yonge Street to Banbury Court, be awarded to MGI Construction Corp. in the amount of $1,567,450.35, excluding taxes; and 3. That the Mayor and Town Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary Agreement, including any and all documents and ancillary agreements required to give effect to same. C4. PRCS17-011 – Purchase Order Increase for Summer Camp Bussing Recommended: 1. That Report No. PRCS17-011 be received; and 2. That the option to renew the Student Transportation of Canada contract be exercised for the third and final year of the Contract ending December 31, 2017; and 3. That Purchase Order No. 957 be increased by $40,000, excluding taxes, to a total of $103,547, excluding taxes, to accommodate bussing for 2017. C5. PBS17-020 – Planning Applications Status List (Information Report dated March 21, 2017, included on agenda per Member of Council request) Recommended: 1. That Report No. PBS17-020 be received for information. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Page 4 of 7 6. Consideration of Items Requiring Discussion (Regular Agenda) R1. IES17-015 – Ten-Year Capital Road Reconstruction Program Recommended: 1. That Report No. IES17-015 be received; and 2. That a service standard be approved whereby the road network be maintained at a Pavement Quality Index (PQI) score of 65 (“Fair”), on average; and 3. That the Town’s 2018 operating and ten-year capital plans for the Reconstruction and Rehabilitation (R&R) of its road network, as well as the Asset Management Plan (AMP), be updated to align with a service standard of maintaining a Pavement Quality Index (PQI) of 65 (“Fair”), on average. R2. FS17-003 – Joint Operations Centre (JOC) Project: Financial Summary Report Recommended: 1. That Report No. FS17-003 and Report No. IES17-001 (Attachment #3) be received; and 2. That the overspending of $103,027 on Capital Project No. 34217 be funded as set out in Report No. FS17-003, and that the capital project be closed; and 3. That the JOC Financial Monitoring Task Force Committee previously established by Council be disbanded; and 4. That the outstanding items be referred to future capital budgets. R3. FS17-014 – Proposed Changes to Regional Property Tax Ratios Recommended: 1. That Report No. FS17-014 be received; and General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Page 5 of 7 2. That the Town of Aurora supports revenue neutral tax ratios when the matter is considered by York Region at its Committee of the Whole meeting of April 13, 2017. R4. FS17-015 – Results of Tax Sale Held April 23, 2015 Recommended: 1. That Report No. FS17-015 be received; and 2. That the Treasurer be authorized to write off the outstanding property tax balances as uncollectible, and vest the parcel of land, Property Roll number 1946-000-096-70000-0000, that was not sold in the Tax Sale of April 23, 2015, and that this parcel of land be offered for sale to the abutting landowners. R5. CS17-001 – Council Chambers and Holland Room Use Policy Recommended: 1. That Report No. CS17-001 be received; and 2. That Policy No. CORP-13 – Council Chambers and Holland Room Use, be approved; and 3. That the 2017 Fees and Charges By-law be amended to include the associated staff resourcing fee for Council Chambers and Holland Room bookings; and 4. That the attached list of Town Council Events be approved. R6. CS17-006 – Vacant Buildings Registry Recommended: 1. That Report No. CS17-006 be received; and 2. That a Vacant Buildings Registry By-law be enacted at a future Council meeting. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Page 6 of 7 R7. FS17-006 – 2018 Town of Aurora Budget Workplan Recommended: 1. That Report No. FS17-006 be received; and 2. That the proposed 2018 budget workplan be approved; and 3. That Council provide direction with respect to the handling of requests for funding, assistance or services in kind received during the budget year outside of the planned special Budget Committee consultation meeting. R8. PRCS17-009 – Property Use Agreement – St. Andrew’s College Soccer Fields Recommended: 1. That Report No. PRCS17-009 be received; and 2. That a License Agreement for the 2017 playing season for the use of soccer fields owned by St. Andrew’s College be approved; and 3. That the Director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services be authorized to execute the 2017 License Agreement, including any and all documents and ancillary agreements required to give effect to same; and 4. That, going forward, the Director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services be authorized to renew the License Agreement on an annual basis, provided that there is no financial impact to the Town, with the Director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services being authorized to execute the necessary renewal Agreements, including any and all documents and ancillary agreements required to give effect to same. 7. Notices of Motion (a) Councillor Gaertner Re: Appreciating Diversity in Aurora General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Page 7 of 7 8. New Business 9. Closed Session 10. Adjournment Town of Aurora Information Report No. IES17-014 Subject: Submission of Annual Drinking Water Quality Report Prepared by: Lindsay Hayworth, Supervisor, Water and Wastewater Department: Infrastructure and Environmental Services Date: March 21, 2017 In accordance with the Procedure By-law, any Member of Council may request that this Information Report be placed on an upcoming General Committee or Council meeting agenda for discussion. Executive Summary This report fulfills the requirements mandated under Schedule 22 of Ontario Regulation (O. Reg.) 170/03, Drinking Water Systems (the “Regulation”), by providing the municipal Council an annual summary report on the quality of the drinking water system for the 2016 reporting year. This report is required to be submitted to Council and publicly posted no later than March 31 following the reporting year ending December 31. Background Legislative amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c.32 (the “Act”) released in 2004 resulted in substantial changes to Water and Wastewater operations. Amendments to O. Reg. 170/03 increased the regulatory compliance requirements on system operations. The amendments also required an increase in reporting by system owners on the performance of systems to the Ministry of the Environment and applicable stakeholders. Reporting under Schedule 22 and Section 11 of O. Reg. 170/03 was mandated, requiring the owner of a drinking water system to prepare an annual report in accordance with the Regulation and submit these reports to Council and the public. Staff has regularly submitted these reports to Council since 2003 and has made the information available to the public through the Town website. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C1 Page 1 of 9 March 21, 2017 Page 2 of 4 Report No. IES17-014 Analysis Ontario Regulation 170/03 Drinking Water System outlines the testing and reporting requirements for water systems The above regulation is in support of the Act and outlines all the testing and reporting requirements for drinking water systems. The attached report fulfills the requirements of this regulation. Results of water quality testing indicate a very reliable and secure water supply for Aurora The attached report provides a summary of the legislative requirements under the Act, and includes the prescribed actions taken to address samples failing to meet parameters referred to in the Regulation. Two (2) adverse samples were reported out of a total of 867 samples. All retest samples passed with no issues. An adverse sample is the result of the presence of bacteria in a test referred to as a “presence/absence test”. In each case there was chlorine present in the sampled water which indicates a secure water system and in all cases the necessary re-sampling protocol resulted in favorable outcomes. This is a very low rate of occurrence and is indicative of a secure water supply. An adverse chlorine residual event occurs when the combined chlorine residual is below the 0.25 mg/L and free chlorine is below 0.05mg/L. There were no adverse chlorine events during the year of 2016. Advisory Committee Review Not applicable. Financial Implications There are no financial implications. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C1 Page 2 of 9 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C1 Page 3 of 9 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C1 Page 4 of 9 Drinking-Water Systems Regulation O. Reg. 170/03 Drinking Water Systems Regulations (PIBS 4435e01) December 2011 Page 1 of 5 OPTIONAL ANNUAL REPORT TEMPLATE Drinking-Water System Number: Drinking-Water System Name: Drinking-Water System Owner: Drinking-Water System Category: Period being reported: Complete if your Category is Large Municipal Residential or Small Municipal Residential Does your Drinking-Water System serve more than 10,000 people? Yes [ ] No [ ] Is your annual report available to the public at no charge on a web site on the Internet? Yes [ ] No [ ] Location where Summary Report required under O. Reg. 170/03 Schedule 22 will be available for inspection. Complete for all other Categories. Number of Designated Facilities served: Did you provide a copy of your annual report to all Designated Facilities you serve? Yes [ ] No [ ] Number of Interested Authorities you report to: Did you provide a copy of your annual report to all Interested Authorities you report to for each Designated Facility? Yes [ ] No [ ] Note: For the following tables below, additional rows or columns may be added or an appendix may be attached to the report List all Drinking-Water Systems (if any), which receive all of their drinking water from your system: Drinking Water System Name Drinking Water System Number Did you provide a copy of your annual report to all Drinking-Water System owners that are connected to you and to whom you provide all of its drinking water? Yes [ ] No [ ] General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C1 Page 5 of 9 Appendix A Drinking-Water Systems Regulation O. Reg. 170/03 Drinking Water Systems Regulations (PIBS 4435e01) December 2011 Page 2 of 5 Indicate how you notified system users that your annual report is available, and is free of charge. [ ] Public access/notice via the web [ ] Public access/notice via Government Office [ ] Public access/notice via a newspaper [ ] Public access/notice via Public Request [ ] Public access/notice via a Public Library [ ] Public access/notice via other method _______________________________________ Describe your Drinking-Water System List all water treatment chemicals used over this reporting period Were any significant expenses incurred to? [ ] Install required equipment [ ] Repair required equipment [ ] Replace required equipment Please provide a brief description and a breakdown of monetary expenses incurred Provide details on the notices submitted in accordance with subsection 18(1) of the Safe Drinking-Water Act or section 16-4 of Schedule 16 of O.Reg.170/03 and reported to Spills Action Centre Incident Date Parameter Result Unit of Measure Corrective Action Corrective Action Date General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C1 Page 6 of 9 Drinking-Water Systems Regulation O. Reg. 170/03 Drinking Water Systems Regulations (PIBS 4435e01) December 2011 Page 3 of 5 Microbiological testing done under the Schedule 10, 11 or 12 of Regulation 170/03, during this reporting period. Number of Samples Range of E.Coli Or Fecal Results (min #)-(max #) Range of Total Coliform Results (min #)-(max #) Number of HPC Samples Range of HPC Results (min #)-(max #) Raw Treated Distribution Operational testing done under Schedule 7, 8 or 9 of Regulation 170/03 during the period covered by this Annual Report. Number of Grab Samples Range of Results (min #)-(max #) Unit of Measure Turbidity Chlorine Fluoride (If the DWS provides fluoridation) Summary of additional testing and sampling carried out in accordance with the requirement of an approval, order or other legal instrument. Date of legal instrument issued Parameter Date Sampled Result Unit of Measure Summary of Inorganic parameters tested during this reporting period or the most recent sample results Parameter Sample Date Result Value Unit of Measure Exceedance Antimony Arsenic Barium Boron Cadmium Chromium *Lead Mercury Selenium Sodium Uranium Fluoride NOTE: For continuous monitors use 8760 as the number of samples. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C1 Page 7 of 9 Drinking-Water Systems Regulation O. Reg. 170/03 Drinking Water Systems Regulations (PIBS 4435e01) December 2011 Page 4 of 5 Nitrite Nitrate *only for drinking water systems testing under Schedule 15.2; this includes large municipal non- residential systems, small municipal non-residential systems, non-municipal seasonal residential systems, large non-municipal non-residential systems, and small non-municipal non-residential systems Summary of lead testing under Schedule 15.1 during this reporting period (applicable to the following drinking water systems; large municipal residential systems, small municipal residential systems, and non-municipal year-round residential systems) Location Type Number of Samples Range of Lead Results (min#) – (max #) Unit of Measure Number of Exceedances Plumbing Distribution Summary of Organic parameters sampled during this reporting period or the most recent sample results Parameter Sample Date Result Value Unit of Measure Exceedance Alachlor Aldicarb Aldrin + Dieldrin Atrazine + N-dealkylated metobolites Azinphos-methyl Bendiocarb Benzene Benzo(a)pyrene Bromoxynil Carbaryl Carbofuran Carbon Tetrachloride Chlordane (Total) Chlorpyrifos Cyanazine Diazinon Dicamba 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) + metabolites 1,2-Dichloroethane 1,1-Dichloroethylene (vinylidene chloride) Dichloromethane 2-4 Dichlorophenol 2,4-Dichlorophenoxy acetic acid (2,4-D) General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C1 Page 8 of 9 Drinking-Water Systems Regulation O. Reg. 170/03 Drinking Water Systems Regulations (PIBS 4435e01) December 2011 Page 5 of 5 Diclofop-methyl Dimethoate Dinoseb Diquat Diuron Glyphosate Heptachlor + Heptachlor Epoxide Lindane (Total) Malathion Methoxychlor Metolachlor Metribuzin Monochlorobenzene Paraquat Parathion Pentachlorophenol Phorate Picloram Polychlorinated Biphenyls(PCB) Prometryne Simazine THM (NOTE: show latest annual average) Temephos Terbufos Tetrachloroethylene 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol Triallate Trichloroethylene 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy acetic acid (2,4,5-T) Trifluralin Vinyl Chloride List any Inorganic or Organic parameter(s) that exceeded half the standard prescribed in Schedule 2 of Ontario Drinking Water Quality Standards. Parameter Result Value Unit of Measure Date of Sample General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C1 Page 9 of 9 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. IES17-016 Subject: Award of Tender IES 2016-103 – Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Sewer Inspection Services Prepared by: Phillip Galin, Acting Operations Manager Department: Infrastructure and Environmental Services Date: April 4, 2017 Recommendation 1. That Report No. IES17-016 be received; and 2. That Tender No. IES 2016-103 for Capital Project No. 41011 – Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Sewer Inspection Services for sewer inspection services at various locations in the Town of Aurora for one (1) Year (with an option to renew for an additional two (2) one (1) year periods), be awarded to Infrastructure Intelligence Services Inc. in the amount of $134,460 excluding taxes; and 3. That the Director of Infrastructure and Environmental Services be authorized to renew Tender IES 2016-103 for an additional two (2), one (1) year periods, pending an annual analysis and satisfactory performance review by the Director; and 4. That the Mayor and Town Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary Agreement, including any and all documents and ancillary agreements required to give effect to same. Executive Summary This report seeks Council approval to award the tender for the services of the Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) of sewer mains, service laterals and catch basins. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C2 Page 1 of 4 April 4, 2017 Page 2 of 4 Report No. IES17-016 Background As part of the Town’s standard waterworks maintenance and rehabilitation practices, a number of ongoing maintenance and rehabilitation programs are undertaken to extend the lifespan of the watermain infrastructure that provide safe drinking water to the Town’s residents. This contract will perform internal inspections of sewer mains, service laterals and catch basins. As part of the Town’s standard sewer maintenance and rehabilitation practices, storm and sanitary sewers are inspected using CCTV inspection techniques to determine the existing conditions of sewers throughout the Town. A thorough sewer condition assessment is warranted to identify deficiencies that could cause damage to property and to the environment. This project will allow staff to identify potential deficiencies in a timely manner, identify future projects, and more accurately predict future budget needs. Particular attention will be given to the sewers located on streets that have been identified in the Town’s Ten-Year Road Reconstruction Plan to determine what, if any, repair or replacement of the existing sewers should be included for the streets being designed for reconstruction. Analysis Table 1 shows a summary of the bids received for this project: Table 1 Firm Name Total Bid (excluding taxes) 1 Infrastructure Intelligence Services Inc. $134,460.00 2 Capital Sewer Services Inc. $135,937.50 3 Clearwater Structures Inc. $138,635.00 4 Wessuc Inc. $176,771.50 5 Empipe Solutions Ltd. $186,954.50 6 Nieltech Services Ltd. $216,666.08 7 T2 Utility Engineers Inc. $226,625.00 8 Liqui-Force Services (Ontario) Inc. $242,096.20 9 Dambro Environmental Inc. $248,178.00 10 614128 Ontario Ltd o/a Trisan Construction $297,466.00 11 D.M. Robichaud Associates Limited $837,827.50 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C2 Page 2 of 4 April 4, 2017 Page 3 of 4 Report No. IES17-016 Eleven firms submitted bids and each of the bids was deemed compliant. Bid prices quoted above are for one (1) year. The Capital budget for this project is $150,000. Table 2 shows a summary of the bid prices for the current year and for the following two (2) years the contract is renewed: Table 2 Year Firm Name Total Bid (excluding taxes) 2017 Infrastructure Intelligence Services Inc. $134,460.00 2018 Infrastructure Intelligence Services Inc. $138,637.50 2019 Infrastructure Intelligence Services Inc. $142,750.00 Verification of the tenders was undertaken by Town staff. The lowest compliant bid was submitted by Infrastructure Intelligence Services Inc. in the amount of $134,460, excluding taxes. Advisory Committee Review Not applicable. Financial Implications Funding in the amount of $150,000 has been approved in the 2017 Capital Budget for Project No. 41011. Communications Considerations There is no external communication required. Link to Strategic Plan This project supports the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting and Exceptional Quality of Life for All through its accomplishment in satisfying requirements in the following key objective within this goal statement: Invest in sustainable infrastructure: Maintain and expand infrastructure to support forecasted population growth through technology, waste management, roads, emergency services and accessibility. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C2 Page 3 of 4 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C2 Page 4 of 4General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C2 Page 4 of 4 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. IES17-017 Subject: Award o f Tender 2017-26-IES – For the Reconstruction of Brookland Avenue from Yonge Street to Banbury Court Prepared by: Anca Mihail, Manager, Engineering and Capital Delivery Department: Infrastructure and Environmental Services Date: April 4, 2017 Recommendation 1. That Report No. IES17-017 be received; and 2. That Tender No. 2017-26-IES for the reconstruction of Brookland Avenue, from Yonge Street to Banbury Court, be awarded to MGI Construction Corp. in the amount of $1,567,450.35, excluding taxes; and 3. That the Mayor and Town Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary Agreement, including any and all documents and ancillary agreements required to give effect to same. Executive Summary This report seeks Council approval to award the tender for the reconstruction of Brookland Avenue from Yonge Street to Banbury Court. The reconstruction work includes road, sidewalk, watermain, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and culvert replacement. Background Brookland Avenue is a local road currently constructed to two-lane urban cross-section. The road consists of a 20m road right of way width, 9.75m asphalt width. The existing roadway is in poor condition and in need of replacement. The existing watermain, culvert, sanitary and storm sewers have aged and need to be replaced. The reconstruction of Brookland Avenue will improve the road condition, provide safer driving conditions, improve drainage qualities and provide safer pedestrian traffic with new sidewalks. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C3 Page 1 of 6 April 4, 2017 Page 2 of 5 Report No. IES17-017 The reconstruction of Brookland Avenue from Yonge Street to Banbury Court is included in the Town of Aurora ten-year Capital Reconstruction program for 2017 with design work completed in 2016. This project has been presented to the community through a public open house and design modifications have been considered where possible to accommodate any comments received through the consultation process. There will be no interaction between the reconstruction of Brookland Avenue and the Highland Gate redevelopment project. The construction access into the Highland Gate redevelopment site will be from Bathurst Street only, in order to prevent any possible pavement damage due to heavy traffic on Brookland Avenue. The capital funding for this project has been approved by Council for delivery in 2017; this report provides the details of the tendering results and recommendation to proceed to construction. Analysis Tender Opening A total of 29 companies picked up the tender documents, and on February 28, 2017 the Tender Opening Committee received seven (7) compliant bids. The lowest compliant bidder for this tender was MGI Construction Corp. as summarized in the following table: Table 1 Firm Name Total Bid (excl. taxes) 1 MGI Construction Corp. $1,567,450.35 2 Direct Underground Inc $1,910,647.21 3 Trisan Construction $1,984,152.60 4 Wyndale Paving Co. Ltd. $2,016,920.50* 5 Moretti Excavating Limited $2,086,235.74 6 MAR-KING Construction Company Ltd. $2,632,985.39 7 DIG-CON International Ltd. $2,692,175.95* *Corrected total due to math errors(s) in Tender. The Capital budget for this project is $1,816,600. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C3 Page 2 of 6 April 4, 2017 Page 3 of 5 Report No. IES17-017 Verification of the tenders was undertaken by Town staff. The lowest compliant bid was submitted by MGI Construction Corp. in the amount of $1,567,450.35, excluding taxes. Project Schedule The Contract is expected to commence in May 2017. Advisory Committee Review Not applicable. Financial Implications Funding in the amount of $1,816,600 has been approved in the 2017 Capital Budget under Project No. 31107. Approved Budget Capital Project 31107 $1,816,600 Total Approved Budget $1,816,600 Less previous commitments $0 Funding available for subject Contract $1,816,600 Contract Award excluding HST $1,567,450 Non-refundable taxes (1.76%) $27,587 Geotechnical Inspection (Under Separate P.O.) $10,000 Arborist Inspection (Under Separate P.O.) $5,000 Sub-Total $1,610,037 Contingency amount (10%) $161,003 Total Funding Required $1,771,041 Favorable Budget Variance $45,558 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C3 Page 3 of 6 April 4, 2017 Page 4 of 5 Report No. IES17-017 Communications Considerations There is no external communication required. Link to Strategic Plan This report supports the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting an Exceptional Quality of Life for All through its accomplishment in satisfying requirements in the following key objective within this goal statement: Invest in sustainable infrastructure: Maintain and expand infrastructure to support forecasted population growth through technology, waste management, roads, emergency services and accessibility. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. Council may choose to not award this contract. The tender evaluation process meets all requirements of the Procurement By-law and awarding this contract is the next step in fulfilling the requirements of the tendering process. If Council chooses to not award this contract, there will continue to be significant maintenance costs to provide safe vehicular access. Conclusions The tender review meets the Procurement By-law requirements and it is recommended that Tender No. 2017-26-IES for the reconstruction of Brookland Avenue be awarded to MGI Construction Corp. in the amount of $1,567,450.35, excluding taxes. Attachments Appendix ‘A’ – Key plan showing the location of proposed road reconstruction. Previous Reports Not applicable. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C3 Page 4 of 6 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C3 Page 5 of 6 CrtBrookland AveGolf Links Dr Nisbet DrBrookland AveRoyal Rd Fairway Dr Dunning Ave BanburyYONGE STREETSanduskyCres KEY PLANRECONSTRUCTION OF BROOKLAND AVENUEFROM YONGE STREET TO BANBURY COURT Map created by the Town of Aurora Infrastructure & Environmental Services Department, March 14th, 2017. Base data provided by York Region and Aurora - GIS. This is not a legal survey. 0 25 50Metres Hwy 404Bathurst StYonge StYonge StBayview AveLeslie StLeslie StHwy 404St John's Sdrd Wellington St EWellingtonSt W Henderson Dr Vandorf Sdrd Bloomington Rd SUBJECTLANDS IES17-017Appendix A General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C3 Page 6 of 6 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. PRCS17-011 Subject: Purchase Order Increase for Summer Camp Bussing Prepared by: Lisa Warth, Manager of Recreation Services Department: Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Date: April 4, 2017 Recommendation 1. That Report No. PRCS17-011 be received; and 2. That the option to renew the Student Transportation of Canada contract be exercised for the third and final year of the Contract ending December 31, 2017; and 3. That Purchase Order No. 957 be increased by $40,000, excluding taxes, to a total of $103,547, excluding taxes, to accommodate bussing for 2017. Executive Summary This purpose of this report is to outline the need to renew the third and final year option with Student Transportation of Canada and to increase the purchase order by $40,000, excluding taxes. Student Transportation of Canada provides transportation for the summer camp program. Background Staff issued a Request for Quotation in Spring 2015 for the provision of a bus service for summer day camps. Bussing needs include daily extended care shuttles from the Stronach Recreation Complex (SARC) to various camp locations, skating days, swimming days, trip days and periodic pick-ups to relocate campers during inclement weather. These services are required to ensure quality day camp programming and to maintain service levels. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C4 Page 1 of 3 April 4, 2017 Page 2 of 3 Report No. PRCS17-011 QB-RFQ # 2015-26 was released on April 15, 2015 for a one-year term and included an option to renew the agreement for two additional one year periods. Analysis Excellent Service Student Transportation of Canada has provided exceptional service to the summer day camp program in both 2015 and 2016. Their drivers are friendly, knowledgeable and flexible. The service is reliable and safe and the busses are in good condition. Administration has been smooth with required documents, questions etc. always provided in a timely manner. Quality programming Swimming, skating, trips and extended care all contribute to the exceptional programming campers experience when they participate in a Town of Aurora Day Camp. Bus service is essential in offering this programming to families. Advisory Committee Review None required Financial Implications $40,000, excluding taxes, has been allocated in the 2017 operating budget. Communications Considerations None. Link to Strategic Plan The Purchase Order increase for Summer Camp bussing supports the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting an exceptional quality of life for all through satisfying the requirements in the following key objectives within this goal statement: Encouraging an active and healthy lifestyle. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C4 Page 2 of 3 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C4 Page 3 of 3 Subject: Town of Aurora Information Report Planning Applications Status List Prepared by: Glen Letman, Manager of Development Planning Department: Planning and Building Services Date: March 21, 2017 No. PBS17-020 In accordance with the Procedure By-law, any Member of Council may request that this Information Report be placed on an upcoming General Committee or Council meeting agenda for discussion. Executive Summary This report provides a summary and update of development applications that have been received by Planning and Building Services since its previous report of December 6, 2016. No Council action is required. Background Attached is a list updating the status of applications being reviewed by Planning and Building Services. The list supersedes the December 6, 2016 Planning Applications Status list and is intended for information purposes. The text in bold italics represents changes in status since the last update of the Planning Applications Status List. It is noted that Part Lot Control Applications are not included on this list as these properties were previously approved for development and are processed through Council approval to allow freehold title to described parcels of land Analysis Since the preparation of the last status list, eight new planning applications have been filed with Planning and Building Services as follows: •Site Plan Application to allow an industrial warehouse, (File: SP-2016-08).•Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment to allow a 159 unit retirement home (and place of worship), (File:OPA-2016-05 and ZBA-2016-13).•Official Plan Amendment to redesignate Institutional lands to Cluster Residential, Environmental Function and Special Policy Areas, (File:OPA 2016-06). General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item C5 Page 1 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 2 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 3 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 4 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 5 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 6 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 7 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 8 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 9 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 10 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 11 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 12 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 13 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 14 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 15 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 16 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 17 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 18 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 19 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 20 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 21 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 22 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 23 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 24 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 25 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 26 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 27 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 28 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 29 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 30 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 31 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 32 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 33 of 34 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item C5 Page 34 of 34 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. IES17-015 Subject: Ten-Year Capital Road Reconstruction Program Prepared by: Anca Mihail, Manager, Engineering and Capital Delivery Department: Infrastructure and Environmental Services Date: April 4, 2017 Recommendation 1. That Report No. IES17-015 be received; and 2. That a service standard be approved whereby the road network be maintained at a Pavement Quality Index (PQI) score of 65 (“Fair”), on average; and 3. That the Town’s 2018 operating and ten-year capital plans for the Reconstruction and Rehabilitation (R&R) of its road network, as well as the Asset Management Plan (AMP), be updated to align with a service standard of maintaining a Pavement Quality Index (PQI) of 65 (“Fair”), on average. Executive Summary This report evaluates Aurora’s road network level of service and recommends a strategy for the maintenance, Reconstruction and Rehabilitation (R&R) of the Town’s road network whose resultant operating and capital plans are based upon a clearly defined service standard of a desired average pavement condition rating. • The maintenance and rehabilitation of Aurora’s road system follows the principles of a Sustainable Asset Management Strategy • Aurora’s road network is currently operating at a “Fair” level of service • The roads R&R analysis was conducted for four (4) scenarios • Each scenario was analyzed for a 20-year period to confirm long term financial stability • The same level of service, “Fair”, is recommended to be maintained for Aurora’s roads network for the next ten (10) years and beyond • Staff recommend that an average road Pavement Quality Index (PQI) of 65 be approved by Council as the standard level of service for the Town’s road network General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R1 Page 1 of 9 April 4, 2017 Page 2 of 8 Report No. IES17-015 Background The Town of Aurora, like all Canadian Municipalities, is a steward of its community’s infrastructure. Well maintained infrastructure fosters prosperity, growth and quality of life for the community’s residents, businesses and visitors. As such, the subject of asset management has been gaining increased public awareness with an emphasis on the practice of Sustainable Asset Management which requires an intimate understanding of what will be required to maintain these services in perpetuity, or as long as they are required, through the use of life cycle costing. It has been the practice of the Engineering Division to report to Council on the ten-year road R&R Program. It is necessary that such a schedule be formulated in advance in order that essential activities leading up to the proposed road reconstruction and/or rehabilitation are properly scheduled. These activities include engineering designs, public input, agency approvals, coordinating utility relocations, etc. The Town of Aurora began formal pavement management investigation using software in 2002 with the use of AECOM’s INFRA/PAVE pavement management system. Staff used the same system from 2002 to 2010. From the data compiled between 2002 and 2010, it was estimated that the road pavements in Aurora were losing about $3.25 million (in 2010 dollars) in value per year. As such the previous roads R&R strategy has been to maintain an average annual investment into the Town’s road network of approximately $3.25 million in combined budget for R&R. The roads replacement strategy was based on “worst-first” policy. In 2015, the Town commissioned Stantec Consulting Ltd. to provide pavement management services for its road system. As a result, a new pavement management system, RoadMatrix, was implemented in conjunction with a Town-wide pavement condition assessment. The pavement condition assessment was completed at the end of 2015, followed by the road analysis which was completed in the summer of 2016. Analysis The maintenance and rehabilitation of Aurora’s road system follows the principles of a Sustainable Asset Management Strategy The Town currently owns approximately 195 centerline-km, or approximately 398 lane- km of roadways. The current replacement value of the Town roads is approximately $275 million. Pavement condition data was collected on all Town roads in the fall of General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R1 Page 2 of 9 April 4, 2017 Page 3 of 8 Report No. IES17-015 2015 and various pavement distresses were captured and evaluated. This resulted in a PQI assigned to each road segment in the road network. The average PQI for the Town of Aurora road network was found to be 67.8 in 2015. Knowing and tracking the current performance level of the road system, through the average overall PQI, allows the Town to assess if the road network is deteriorating over time under current funding practices. The pavement management philosophy is to “apply the right treatment to the right road at the right time”. A well-implemented pavement management system allows the Town to maximize its benefits realized from lower-cost treatments such as preventive maintenance and rehabilitation activities, by targeting interventions within the road network before more costly replacement and construction alternatives become necessary. The RoadMatrix pavement management software analysis provides the Town with an ability to set service level targets, and determine the most cost-beneficial pavement maintenance and rehabilitation strategies to be applied, at the most optimal time. The system uses the results of the pavement condition survey, coupled with predictive pavement deterioration curves and decision tree models, to determine appropriate maintenance and rehabilitation treatments for each pavement segment in the Town’s road network. Aurora’s road network is currently operating at a “Fair” level of service with a PQI of 67.8 recorded in 2015 The results of the pavement condition assessment have determined that the Town of Aurora’s road network is currently operating at a “Fair” level of service as indicated by an overall average PQI of 67.8. Table No. 1 summarizes the PQI ranges for all the roads in the Town: Table No. 1 PQI Range Description Lane-km % of Road Network 90-100 Excellent 12.2 3.1% 70-89 Good 147.4 37.1% 50-69 Fair 219.8 55.3% 30-49 Poor 18.3 4.6% 0-29 Failed 0 0.0% Total: 397.7 100% General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R1 Page 3 of 9 April 4, 2017 Page 4 of 8 Report No. IES17-015 Less than five (5) percent of roads fall into the “Poor” and “Failed” categories which indicates that the Town’s asset management approach to pavement maintenance and rehabilitation has been implemented effectively over many years. However, greater funding and proactive maintenance practices will be required to maintain the road network at the current level as the overall system continues to age. Previous experience shows that a “worst-first” approach in addressing the rehabilitation needs of the roads network can have a limited impact or even a potentially negative impact on the overall condition of the road network over time. By allocating the majority of the viable funding to reconstruction needs, far fewer lane-km of roads can be addressed versus if the same level of funding was used to address roads at a more cost-effective and higher level of service in their life cycle. In general, light rehabilitation or preventive maintenance is more cost-effective than major rehabilitation by minimizing the deterioration of a road at a fraction of the cost needed for a full-depth road reconstruction. Over time, this can reduce the backlog of costly major rehabilitation needs. Allocating more of the available funding to roads at a currently higher level of service can be difficult to implement as it often raises public concerns when some streets in Poor condition may not be looked at as a priority, and the reconstruction is delayed. However, over time, maintaining the focus on keeping more roads operating at an optimal desired level of service will ultimately free up available budgets to address the diminishing backlog of reconstruction needs. A roads R&R analysis was conducted for four scenarios for a period of 20 years to confirm long-term financial stability The following four (4) scenarios have been analyzed: 1. Do nothing 2. $3.25 million combined R&R annual budget 3. Maintain an average overall PQI of 65 for the road system 4. Improve the average overall PQI to 70 for the road system. The results of the analysis for all four (4) scenarios are presented in detail below: 1) Do nothing: This scenario has no financial impact on the Town’s finances, however after ten (10) years the road network average PQI is expected to fall from 65 in 2017 to 40 in 2027 moving the road network from a “Fair" level of service into the “Poor” level of service. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R1 Page 4 of 9 April 4, 2017 Page 5 of 8 Report No. IES17-015 This strategy is not recommended since it will cause the road infrastructure to deteriorate considerably over the next ten (10) years. 2) Maintain a $3.25 million combined R&R annual budget based on the previous ten- year roads R&R spending per year: Under this funding scenario the network average PQI of 65 in 2017 is expected to fall to 55.9 by 2027 and to 40 by 2037. The total required budget for ten (10) years is $32,490,000 with an average spending per year from the R&R reserve of $3,249,000. This scenario produces a healthy road R&R balance at the end of 2028. However, the general condition of the Town’s roads would have deteriorated to a PQI score lower than our current PQI of 65, with funding in the roads R&R reserve being underutilized. 3) Maintain a Town-wide average PQI of 65 This scenario was run to maintain a network PQI of 65 for the next 20 years with an average of $4.8 million spent annually for the first ten (10) years (2018 to 2027). This scenario also confirms long-term financial stability by showing a healthy balance in 2039 (please see Appendix “A”). 4) Improve the average Town-wide PQI to 70 Under this funding scenario the average network PQI is gradually improved over the next ten-year period resulting in a final average PQI of 70 by 2027. This scenario would move the roads’ network level of service from “Fair” to “Good”. Based on a 10-year term the required annual average budget is $5.4 million. This scenario is very aggressive since it will allow the roads R&R reserve to fall below the desired target level for the next 20 years and put substantial pressure on the roads reserve, however in the long term it is still financially sustainable (please see Appendix. “A”). A PQI of 65 is proposed for the next ten (10) years for the Town’s road system A road R&R Program has to be established solely upon achieving or maintaining a clearly defined asset service standard, financially sustainable over a desired time period. Based on this principle, once the roads R&R program is established, it has to be adjusted to address project delivery capacity constraints and to ensure alignment with the R&R of underground integrated assets such as watermain, sanitary and storm sewers. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R1 Page 5 of 9 April 4, 2017 Page 6 of 8 Report No. IES17-015 Based on this strategy, staff recommend that Scenario 3, to maintain the average overall PQI of 65, be considered as the roads R&R service standard and that the Town’s ten-year road R&R Program be developed based upon this scenario. The Program will also consider the condition of the underground infrastructure and pedestrian access (e.g. sidewalks). Additionally, grouping deficient roads in close proximity to each other to make larger projects will be done wherever possible, to reduce design and construction costs and to minimize impact to the local residents due to multiple disruptions. The ten-year road R&R will be incorporated into the ten-year Capital Investment Plan and will be presented to Council at a future date. Advisory Committee Review Not applicable. Financial Implications As described in detail in the Analysis section above, four (4) scenarios have been analyzed from a financial point of view: 1. Do nothing 2. $3.25 million combined R&R annual budget 3. Maintain an average overall PQI of 65 for the road system 4. Improve the average overall PQI to 70 for the road system Scenario 1 has no impact on the Town’s road network R&R reserve, however it is not recommended since it will move the overall road system’s level of service from “Fair” to “Poor” which is unacceptable. Scenarios 2 and 3 are financially feasible, however under Scenario 2 the road network will further deteriorate and this will result in underutilized monies in the roads R&R reserve. For Scenario 3 there is a potential need to accelerate the replenishing of the R&R reserve beyond 2039, however this is far in the future and involves many unknown factors related to the road system degradation, and it is too early to consider these now. Scenario 4 is financially feasible in the long term, however it will produce funding pressure on the roads R&R reserve, resulting in a reserve balance that is below the desired target level until 2038 (Appendix “A”). General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R1 Page 6 of 9 April 4, 2017 Page 7 of 8 Report No. IES17-015 Staff recommend Scenario 3. This scenario provides the benefit of maintaining the Town road system’s level of service in a “Fair” condition on average, with manageable financial spending and resource capacity for all required R&R needs. Furthermore, staff recommend that an average road PQI of 65 be approved by Council as the standard level of service for Town’s roads. In addition, there is a growing requirement by the Province of Ontario for municipalities to base their infrastructure rehabilitation and replacement decisions upon maintaining clearly defined service standards. For Aurora’s road system, maintaining an average PQI of 65 represents a sustainable service level strategy that is based upon feasible financial spending. This demonstrates that the Town understands the principles of Sustainable Asset Management that requires the maintenance of the road system in perpetuity which is in alignment with the Province’s direction. Communications Considerations Communication through the budget process as required. Link to Strategic Plan The ten-year Road Reconstruction Program supports the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting an Exceptional Quality of Life for All through its accomplishment in satisfying requirements in the following key objectives within this goal statement: Invest in sustainable infrastructure: Maintain and expand infrastructure to support forecasted population growth through technology, waste management, roads, emergency services and accessibility. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation Alternatives to the recommendation are as follows: 1. Do nothing: this is not recommended since it will decrease the existing level of service. 2. Maintain an annual budget need of $3.25 million: not recommended since it will decrease the existing level of service. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R1 Page 7 of 9 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item R1 Page 8 of 9 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item R1 Page 9 of 9 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. FS17-003 Subject: Joint Operations Centre (JOC) Project: Financial Summary Report Prepared by: Dan Elliott, Director of Financial Services - Treasurer Department: Financial Services Date: April 4, 2017 Recommendation 1. That Report No. FS17-003 and Report No. IES17-001 (Attachment #3) be received; and 2. That the overspending of $103,027 on Capital Project #34217 be funded as set out in Report No. FS17-003, and that the capital project be closed; and 3. That the JOC Financial Monitoring Task Force Committee previously established by Council be disbanded; and 4. That the outstanding items be referred to future capital budgets. Executive Summary At its meeting of January 24, 2017, General Committee was presented with report IES17-001 Facilities Projects Status Report – JOC Final Report. This report was referred back to staff for additional clarity, and to address a number of questions from members of Committee. The following summary tables pull together some key figures: Budget Actual JOC Lands: Purchase of JOC lands $4,058,826 $4,058,826 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 1 of 25 April 4, 2017 Page 2 of 12 Report No. FS17-003 Budget Actual JOC Construction: Design & Construction $20,385,589 $20,488,616 Contract Extension Costs 169,500 169,500 Total charged to capital project to date $20,555,089 $20,658,116 Costs to Complete (items removed from scope) 0 1,493,200 Total Construction Costs $20,555,089 $22,151,316 Budget Actual JOC Financing Costs: Financing costs to date 206,174 Financing costs future est. 884,100 Total Financing Costs $1,090,274 • Funding sources for the project have remained consistent, and are detailed in the funding section of this report. • Estimated net proceeds of $2.5 to 2.9 million from the sale of Scanlon Court yard properties will be used to recharge the Proceeds of Sale of Lands reserve fund, which was used as a source of funding for the project. Background The Joint Operations Center project was necessary in order to expand the physical capacity of the current operations center to meet the needs of the growing community, both past growth, and future growth of the Town. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 2 of 25 April 4, 2017 Page 3 of 12 Report No. FS17-003 The current project began with discussions in 2010 or before, and moved through a space needs study, followed by a property search and evaluation. Ultimately, in 2012, the site on Industrial Parkway North was purchased. The project then moved from site design concepts through to detailed final design specifications. From there, in 2014, the project was tendered for construction. This report will provide clear financial details in the following areas: • The purchase of the lands, and funding sources • The budget evolution • Costs of the design and construction of the JOC • The funding sources used to pay for the project • The costs of interim financing, and long term estimates of financing costs • Details about the sale of the Scanlon Court properties This report is intended to deliver clear factual numbers about this project. It is not intended to revisit the decision to proceed or the value for money outcomes. Analysis Purchase of Land was made with separate budget Council approved the purchase of the land for the new JOC at its Closed Session meeting of July 17, 2012, confirming a final offer on September 18, 2012. The total cost for the 11 acre site was $4 million, with net closing and legal costs amounting to a further $58,826. This total land purchase cost was funded from reserves in a similar proportional relationship to that of the construction phase of the JOC as follows: • Proceeds of Sale of Land Reserve $ 1,683,052 • Development Charges – Public Works 1,408,154 • Development Charges – Parks 967,620 $ 4,058,826 The land purchase was not a part of any budget for the JOC construction presented to Council. It was anticipated at the time of purchase that land improvements in the way of of grading and cut/fill operations would need to be completed as part of the construction phase. These works were included in the scope of work for the construction contract. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 3 of 25 April 4, 2017 Page 4 of 12 Report No. FS17-003 Based on other similar parcels and appraisals, the land was purchased at a discount of $100,000 to $200,000 per acre ($1.1M to $2.2million) due to the site grading issues. Budget for Project Design and Construction went through a number of iterations The project estimates and budget for the JOC’s Design and Construction began many years ago. As we know, at original project conception, an estimate is made by staff for discussion purposes with staff. As the concept gains traction, and more details are clarified, the estimates continue to change over time. At the beginning of 2014, Council was asked for direction with respect to elements to include in the base building, and elements to be shown in the tender documents as optional pricing. The following table shows the Optional Items not included in the Budget and Contract Award: Class B Estimate (from architect) Contractor Option Price Drive in shed Heritage materials storage $482,600 151,000 Combined $241,000 Covered vehicles storage area 592,300 179,000 IT disaster recovery equipment 130,000 Not bid The final designs and tender documents were finalized to reflect the direction of Council with respect to the optional elements. The following table details the 2012 Class D concept estimate, the 2014 Class B pre-tender estimate, and the contract award bid pricing arising from the tender. The low bid tender was $1,868,000 lower than the second low bid on the contract. The tender was awarded by Council on August 12, 2014 on consideration of report IES14-042. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 4 of 25 April 4, 2017 Page 5 of 12 Report No. FS17-003 Class D Estimate (2012 concept plus escalation to Nov/13) as per IES14-001 Class B Estimate (after detailed design) as per IES14-001 Contract Award Budget August 2014 IES14-042 Building 9,785,000 9,807,000 12,271,219 Salt Dome 721,000 844,000 223,920 Site works 3,152,000 5,443,000 4,508,858 Construction Contract 17,004,000 Non-refundable taxes 299,270 Architect fees 820,000 820,000 954,084 FFE & IT 77,000 125,000 125,000 Escalation Allowance 322,000 Contingency Included above 1,610,000 1,853,235 Third Party Testing 150,000 Subtotal 14,555,000 18,971,000 20,385,589 Added to Base by Council IES14-001: Third Floor Shell Back-up Generator Rain Harvesting LED lighting Green Roofs 940,800 434,000 47,800 103,500 82,500 Included in construction contract Base Budget 14,555,000 20,579,600 20,385,589 December 2016 budget amendment for Contract Extension Costs 169,500 Final Approved Project Budget $20,555,089 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 5 of 25 April 4, 2017 Page 6 of 12 Report No. FS17-003 Despite a formal budget approval of Council of $20,579,600 in January 2014, at time of Contractor award by Council in August 2014, the project budget was formalized by staff for reporting purposes at the $20,385,589 amount, based on the contract award report IES14-042 of August 12, 2014. This staff reporting budget was $194,011 lower than the budget formally approved by Council. There was no provision in the budget for the use of a third party project manager. In December 2016, staff presented a confidential report regarding contract extension costs of the contractor. Council approved a budget amendment of a further $169,500, to be funded in the same proportions from the same sources as the rest of the construction budget. Actual Costs for Construction have recently been reported in detail The recent report IES17-001 on January 24, 2017 included a lot of details regarding the costs of construction. Attachment #1 sets out a table which attempts to summarize this information differently. The top portion of the schedule focusses on the financials with regard to the Buttcon contract for the construction, while the balance of the schedule speaks to all other costs of the project for the construction. The costs included for OneSpace the architects includes $95,152 of costs related to space needs studies, and location search and evaluation leading to site selection. It is unclear whether these costs incurred prior to 2013 were considered by IES staff when setting the budgets presented to Council in 2014. The attachment shows both Change Order cost reductions for items removed from the project, as well as a list of costs required to complete the project not included in the project budget. Internal construction staff prepared a detailed estimate sheet to develop the costs to complete the asphalt paving works. Prior to final tendering, staff and the architect worked to “value engineer” the project to bring the estimated costs to within a budget target. In that process, a number of elements of the project scope were dropped. Some of these items are now considered required for the safety and security of the facility and have now been shown on Attachment #1 as costs to complete the project. Two other items were removed which are considered necessary by staff for operational efficiencies; a staircase from the greenhouse down to the south paved secured area, and a dumpster bin with truck dumping access. Costs for these two items are yet to be determined. The Matchell yard currently has a dump facility which is being used until one can be constructed at the JOC. These two projects will be presented to Council for consideration in future year budgets. Top soil from the site was stripped and stockpiled near the rear of the lot at the beginning of construction, to be respread upon completion prior to sodding. At the time of sodding, this stockpiled soil was found to be of very poor quality. At this time, it is not clear if this material will be sufficient for the Arboretum to complete their planned tree plantings in this area, or whether it will need to be removed or covered with better material. Costs, if any, are unknown at this time. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 6 of 25 April 4, 2017 Page 7 of 12 Report No. FS17-003 The Town is currently holding a $40,000 deficiencies holdback from the contractor pending resolution of various minor items. The full $40,000 will be paid to the contractor, and has been charged to the Capital project, and is held as an accounts payable holdback in the Town’s records. Accordingly, it has been included as spent in the details of this report. As noted earlier in the budget section above, Council formally approved a final capital budget amount of $20,579,600, while staff set at the construction budget and began reporting using the project cost estimate from Report IES14-042 of $20,385,589, later revised by $169,500 to a total of $20,555,089. The difference of $194,011 approved funding was never adjusted by Council formally. Depending on which budget number used, the results of the project spending to date and costs to complete are as follows: Staff’s reporting budget Council Approved Funding Budget $20,385,589 $20,579,600 Contract Extension Costs approved by Council 169,500 169,500 Revised Budget Amount 20,555,089 $20,749,100 Total Expected Costs of Construction project, excluding financing, from Attachment #1 22,151,316 22,151,316 Project Variance $1,596,227 $1,402,216 7.77% 6.76% Sources of Funding for the project has remained constant This project was included for funding in the recent Development Charges Background Study as it relates to expanding operational capacity as demanded by past and future growth of the community. As the JOC supports both roads and parks operations, funding was included in both components of the development charges. Since the old facility is being replaced by this new facility, not all of the cost of the new project can be cast upon the DC source; a related component must be funded from other sources such as Infrastructure Repair and Replacement (R&R) reserves. Due to the magnitude of this project, and the lack of sufficient funds in the infrastructure R&R reserves, alternative funding was identified to be sourced from the sale of lands via the reserve. It was recognized at that time that this reserve would be receiving sufficient funding contributions from both the sale of the existing Scanlon Court operations facilities as General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 7 of 25 April 4, 2017 Page 8 of 12 Report No. FS17-003 well as the sale of vacant lands which the Town had recently developed and had listed for sale known as the Leslie Street lands. The Joint Operations Center project was approved with the budget and funding sources presented in the following table. The funding for the contract extension administration costs was approved by Council in a confidential report in December 2016, and was funded from the same sources in the same proportions as shown in the table. Insufficient funding from identified sources was on hand, requiring interim financing As the funding sources were not fully in hand, but had a reasonable expectation of being collected within a 10 year time frame (staff will provide more details in regards to the Town’s anticipated development activity in a future report to council), Council authorized that funding shortfalls be financed in the interim by a Construction Line of Credit, (CLOC) to a maximum of the full project budget amount, until the project was completed. At the conclusion of the project construction, the CLOC would be refinanced. No specific financing strategy for the long term was approved at the time of approval of the CLOC. The CLOC was sourced through Infrastructure Ontario who offered the lowest available rate at the time. The CLOC is a secured structure, with a variable interest rate which is updated each month. Interest only payments must be made each month. The line of credit can be paid down in any increment at any time. Upon completion of the project, the CLOC was extended by Council and Infrastructure Ontario until January 31, 2018, at which time debenture options would be explored. The extension gives the Town additional time to collect outstanding DC’s from the 2C growth. At this time, the project budget has been funded through some collection of DC’s, some collection of sales of lands, and the balance by way of the Line of Credit as follows: Funding Sources Approved Budget for Construction Additional Revised Construction Budget Parks Development Charges $4,859,903 $40,700 $4,900,603 Roads Development Charges $7,072,501 $59,400 $7,131,901 Sale of Lands Proceeds $8,453,185 $69,400 $8,522,585 Total $20,385,589 $169,500 $20,555,089 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 8 of 25 April 4, 2017 Page 9 of 12 Report No. FS17-003 Revised Construction Budget (from table above) Current Funding Applied to Jan 2017 % of Funding Applied Funded by Parks DC’s $4,900,603 $1,712,872 35.0% Funded by Roads DC’s 7,131,901 4,195,070 58.8% Funded by Sale of Lands Reserve 8,522,585 8,522,585 100% Funded by Construction Line of Credit 0 6,124,562 - Total $20,555,089 $20,555,089 The Roads DC portion of funding is both larger, and further advanced as the previous DC Background study included the JOC all under Roads, and accordingly, past collections have been applied, but all are categorized as Roads contributions. Due to year end work within Finance, the funding from the DC’s has now been updated, and a payment to the CLOC is pending to reduce the CLOC to the $6,124,562 amount above. Financing Costs to date and expected As at December 31, 2016, the balance on the CLOC was $7,218,815, and only $6,124,562 on February 28, 2017. Interest costs to December 31, 2016 total $206,174, with a current variable interest rate of 1.53%. Interest charges for the debt are paid directly by the DC reserve accounts, as financing costs were not included in the construction budget approved by Council. (This is consistent with the budget approach for the SARC where financing was also used) While the existing CLOC will stay fully open for the next year, if the CLOC were debentured today at a market ten year rate of 2.64%, the total interest incurred for the debenture would be $884,100 with annual payments of $700,864. The DC Background Study report incorporated the anticipated financing charges into setting the DC rates, and accordingly, all future interest incurred can be funded by the DC collections. Sale of Scanlon Court Properties The old site of the Operations Center was actually two adjoining properties. For reference here, the Parks side is the “north lot”, while the IES side is the “south lot”. The Town entered a conditional confidential sales agreement to sell both properties to an adjacent land owner for purposes of their business expansion needs. The Town General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 9 of 25 April 4, 2017 Page 10 of 12 Report No. FS17-003 moved out of both lots into the new JOC in April 2016, with final move out completed in June. The north lot, including the old salt shed was transferred to the buyer in June 2016 for a net compensation of $1,000,000. During the nearly forty year ownership by the Town, the south lot became contaminated through fuel spills and other accidental releases of materials. The Town has entered a contract for the rehabilitation, ongoing monitoring, and certification of record of site conditions. The contract, based on preliminary investigations, was awarded in the amount of $164,500 which includes the removal of the old fueling systems and tanks, removal and proper disposal of contaminated soils, and year- long monitoring of ground water and soils as required to prepare the Record of Site Condition. This contracted work includes performing additional tests. Depending on the results of the additional testing work, there may be additional discoveries and requisite costs not included in the current contract. The details of the sale transaction for the south lot remain confidential as Council has addressed this sale in closed session and the transaction has not yet closed. Accordingly, staff cannot specify the sale price for this property in this report. Based on the above information, and other information previously reported or discussed by staff regarding the sale or expected sale proceeds of the Scanlon properties, it is fair to suggest the total expected proceeds from these two sales, net of the costs of remediation will be in the $2.5 to 2.9 million range. The net proceeds of the sale of the Scanlon properties will be contributed to the Proceeds of Sale of Lands reserve fund. This reserve has been a key funding source for the both the purchase of lands for and the construction of the new JOC. Advisory Committee Review In January 2014, Council requested the formation of a “Joint Operations Center construction budget control task force” to oversee and monitor the JOC construction project financials on a regular basis. In July 2014, the Terms of Reference for the Financial Monitoring Task Force was approved by Council. The Task Force met monthly throughout the construction period for the project, reviewing progress of the project, change orders issued, overall project spending, and funding matters. The reports prepared for the Task Force by staff appeared on regular GC agendas following the Task Force review. With the completion of the project, the Financial Monitoring Task Force should now be formally disbanded. Financial Implications The financial facts arising from the project have been disclosed in this report. All costs have been disclosed. The JOC Land Purchase, and the JOC Construction capital projects are now ready to close. No further charges are being incurred to either project. The overspent budget amount of $103,027 is recommended to be funded in the same proportions and funding sources as the main project costs. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 10 of 25 April 4, 2017 Page 11 of 12 Report No. FS17-003 Financing costs will continue to be incurred and funded directly by the DC reserve funds affected until fully paid. Some of the future costs to complete the project have already been incorporated into the 2017 budget, while others are planned for future years’ capital budgets. Lessons learned Staff have reviewed the history, handling, management processes and interim reporting related to this project. Several areas for improvement for future major projects have been identified as follows: • Standardization of the town’s internal project management framework • Improved internal financial reporting and project management financial skills • Larger projects should have a financial analyst assigned to assist in the monitoring of project expenses • Greater clarification of the roles of any steering or monitoring committee • Improved clarity of project scope, inclusions and exclusions from the beginning, with clarity for Council as well. • Improved understanding of the evolution of initial concept estimates through to final construction tender budgets. • Clear separation of pre construction costs and budgets (space needs, concept plans, location and site selection and acquisition costs) from detailed design, construction and commissioning costs and budget. Communications Considerations This report is intended to conclude all internal reporting with respect to the JOC construction project. Link to Strategic Plan Open and transparent financial reporting supports the principles accountability to the public set out in the Town’s Strategic Plan. Alternatives to the Recommendations This is primarily an information report. Council can provide other direction if desired. Conclusions The construction phase of the building and yards is now complete, the contractor has been paid in full, save for a few minor deficiencies. Accordingly, Council’s project monitoring committee can be dissolved. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 11 of 25 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item R2 Page 12 of 25 Aurora Joint Operations Center Final Financial Report - Details of Capital Spending Buttcon Construction Contract Buttcon Contract - Original Award Amount, excl. taxes $17,004,000 Change orders: Major Scope Reductions: Green roof becomes white roof (44,963) Delete entry pylon sign, but install conduits (40,000) Delete on-site landscaping (71,125) Delete wire cages for equipment storage (43,000) Delete rear parking area asphalt (492,400) Delete top coat asphalt front and sides (125,715) (817,203) Soils issues change orders 843,912 Other Change Orders throughout project - net 634,102 Net all Change Orders, as last reported IES16-049 May 17, 2016 660,811 Final Change Orders - May to October 2016 48,871 709,682 Final Amended Contract Billing per Final Buttcon Progress Billing Invoice $17,713,682 Contract Extension Administration adjustment 169,500 Total Paid to Buttcon in respect of project $17,883,182 Plus non-refundable taxes 311,761 Total cost to project budget in respect of Buttcon.$18,194,943 OneSpace Architects: - space needs and site selection/evaluation costs to Dec. 2012 95,152 - all costs January 2013 to date, incl detail design 1,077,169 Project Management Fees - MHPM 123,834 Testing, Soil Engineering, Inspection 203,300 Other Direct Expenses of Project 860,691 Total Capital Budget Approved, incl. Contract Extension Funding $20,555,089 Other direct expenses, overspent budget amount 103,027 Total Costs charged to Capital Budget, including all non-refundable taxes $20,658,116 2016 Operating Funds used to complete greenhouse floor 60,000 Landscaping to be completed with 2017 operating costs 30,000 Fuel monitoring system 2017 capital budget 100,000 Entry Pylon sign future budget (conduits already installed)40,000 Complete rear parking asphalt previously deleted from contract - 2 layers 890,200 Complete top coat asphalt previously deleted from contract 270,000 Furniture to complete as spec'd 45,000 Ext.wayfinding and ident.signage (excluding pylon sign) deleted pre tender 8,000 Automated security entry gate, deleted pre tender 50,000 1,493,200 Total Expected Costs of Construction Project, excluding financing $22,151,316 Approved Construction Budget ($20,385,589 plus $169,500)20,555,089 Project Variance $1,596,227 Over Budget 7.77% Prepared by Financial Services Department March 2017 Note: $130,000 solar panel installation project on the JOC is a separate capital project and was never considered as part of the project. It has not been reflected in the values above. Costs required to complete project, not in budget Report # FS17-003 Attachment #1 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 13 of 25 Report No. FS17-003Attachment #2Joint Operations Centre Financial Monitoring Task ForceJOC Monthly Financial Funding Reportas at December 31, 2016External Debt: current monthly variable rate: 1.50%$20,555,089 $12,032,504 $8,522,585 $20,555,089 $- $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000Project Funding ModelRevised Budget $20,555,089BudgetSale ofLandDC'sDebt:ConstructionLine ofCreditFinalFundingInterim FundingDC$5,907,942 Sale of Lands$8,522,585 Esxternal Debt$6,124,562 $- $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 $7,000,000 $8,000,000 $9,000,000Funded to dateProject Cost to Date by SourceGeneral Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 14 of 25 Report No. FS17-003Attachment #2Joint Operations Centre Financial Monitoring Task ForceJOC Monthly Financial Funding Reportas at December 31, 2016$5.91$8.52 $6.12 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13DC Land SalesDebtFunding vs Targets($millions)39.5% 100%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%DC Land SalesFunding: Percent of TargetGeneral Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 15 of 25 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. IES17-001 Subject: Facility Projects Status Report- JOC Final Report Prepared by: Ilmar Simanovskis, Director Department: Infrastructure and Environmental Services Date: January 24, 2017 Recommendation 1.That Report No. IES17-001 be received for information. Executive Summary This report provides Council with a final update on the new Joint Operations Centre (JOC) project. This report is intended to provide a comprehensive summary of the project and concluding comments on the closeout of the contract and use of the facility. •Overall project delivery period was from mid-2008 to December 2016 •Project scope and budget developed through several needs studies and design requirements iterations culminating in a suitable project that met Town operational needs and satisfied funding envelope requirements •Land market conditions and purchase of a challenging site resulted in significant benefit to Town as site improvement costs were at a significant discount compared to cost of a comparable high quality site •Additional investment of $616,000 to address unforeseen site condition costs was offset by removing or deferring project elements to maintain overall budget target •Future work valued at $600,000 will be budgeted in future capital program starting 2018 •Staff occupied the building in April 2016 and have been successfully operating on the site Background Council approved Capital Project No. 34217 for the construction of the Joint Operations Centre through a series of annual budget cycles and staff reports starting in 2008. Attachment #3 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 16 of 25 January 24, 2017 Page 2 of 10 Report No. IES17-001 Monthly reporting of project progress and financial status has been provided to Council during the construction period of the project. This report is the final reconciliation and closeout report of the project. Analysis This report provides a summary of key decisions and outcomes for the project As part of the closeout process of the construction of a new operations centre, a number of aspects have been evaluated based on early project risk considerations and final project outcomes. This review is intended to provide Council with a comprehensive summary of key project decisions made following award of the tender through to construction and final delivery of the building. Project scope and budget verified during pre-tender approval process At the Special General Committee meeting of January 7, 2014 the scope and budget of the JOC was verified and approved. The capital construction budget of $18,971,000 excluding optional items was approved. Option Description Cost Estimate Council Direction Third Floor Shell Space (5,600 SF) 940,800 Include in project Full Back-up Generator 434,000 Include in project Rain Water Harvesting System 47,800 Include in project LED Lighting in Garage Bays 103,500 Include in project Green Roofs 82,555 Include in project Savings if LEED Certification was Deleted (LEED Standard with no Certification) -95,500 LEED cert to remain Subtotal Included items 1,608,655 Drive In Shed (8,600 SF) 482,600 Optional item Heritage Building Material Storage (2,700 SF) 151,000 Optional item Covered Vehicle Storage Area (8,000 SF) 592,300 Optional item IT Disaster Recovery Centre 130,000 Optional item Subtotal Optional Items 1,355,900 Paper Records Archives (1,500 SF) 281,000 Delete from project The revised budget including the additional items of $1,608,600 above was $20,579,655 assuming budget values for all “included” items above. The optional items would require separate approval pending the results of the overall tender and the value of each optional item. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 17 of 25 January 24, 2017 Page 3 of 10 Report No. IES17-001 Project tender approval granted in August 2014 and awarded to Buttcon Ltd. At the Council meeting of August 12, 2014 the project was awarded to Buttcon Limited for the value of $17,004,000. All of the optional items were deleted from the project to stay within the Council approved budget of $20,579,655. When including all other committed costs related to Architect fees etc., the total committed project budget was $20,385,589 (Part 1 of financial table) resulting in the project coming in $194,066 under the approved budget. Building completion on time based on overall delivery and move-in targets The construction duration of the project was set at 14 months as stipulated in the tender documents. Early tendering resulted in the project start advancing one month and starting September 2014. Although the tendered schedule forecasted the project completing in early November 2015, a schedule contingency was factored into the overall project to accommodate unplanned delays and manage building completion expectations. The target occupancy and move-in schedule was set for the spring of 2016 and this move in target was achieved. Overall land purchase and improvement costs proved significant financial benefit to project The following table summarizes the land investment costs for the 11 acre site purchase for the new operations centre. Option Cost per Acre Total Cost Industrial Site (Purchased Oct 2012) 363,000 4,000,000 Site Development Premium (based on actual costs) 167,860 1,846,506 Total cost for JOC site 531,820 5,846,506 Land Valuation for Comparable site (2015) 950,000 10,450,000 Net financial benefit to Town 4,603,494 The use of this site has resulted in an increased intrinsic project value of $4.6M (2015 valuation) compared to the next best option. The decision to invest in land improvements has been extremely favourable to the Town as it has left the other commercially marketable lands owned by the Town to be made available for sale at full market value. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 18 of 25 January 24, 2017 Page 4 of 10 Report No. IES17-001 The tendered cost of the site improvements component of the contract was $1,230,000. An additional cost of $616,506 was incurred to address unexpected soil conditions that made completion of the parking areas unachievable with the native materials found on site. This increase resulted in the site costs increasing to $1,846,506 actual cost for site improvements. Approved scope reductions achieve budget target Staff Report IES15-068 recognized the net impact of additional site development costs and offered a number of scope reduction options to bring the project costs in line with the budget. Reductions that were considered were identified as work that could either be completed at a later date, at a lower cost (by staff or other contracted services), or that could be deleted with minimal impact to the project. These scope reductions were approved by Council to maintain the project budget targets. Final project completed within budget but future needs remain to be completed There are two groups of additional needs that required consideration as an impact to the overall project budget. These additions include costs for additional general conditions costs for the contractor related to contract duration extension (overall project schedule relative to the contracted construction schedule), and the cost of providing additional fuel monitoring equipment. This additional cost is $269,500 of which $100,000 for fuel monitoring is approved as part of the 2017 capital program. The remaining $169,500 is to be funded from the same original capital project sources. The greenhouse floor was also considered separately and completed at a cost of $160,470 of which $60,000 was funded from the operating budget. In addition, there is need for future works being a pylon entrance sign, remaining landscaping, and asphalt and road base construction. These items total $590,000 and will be brought forward in the 2018 capital budget. LEED certification progressing Documentation of all the planned elements for LEED certification have been compiled and submitted for review and approval. Timing for completion of this review is uncertain and a separate report will be provided to Council once the results are known. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 19 of 25 January 24, 2017 Page 5 of 10 Report No. IES17-001 Financial Implications The financial table summarizes the financial stages of the project as described in the analysis. Part 1 is the approved construction budget as reported in Staff report IES14-042 which was reduced from the approved capital budget of $20,579,600 based on final tender results and approved options additions and deletions. Part 2 summarizes the project additions and deletions excluding the impact of the additional soils remediation requirements which were funded from the $1,853,235 contingency allowance. These changes have a negative impact of $102,069 on the approved budget. Part 3 represents the additional soils remediation costs that, although considered in the land value analysis, were not expressly funded during budget development. Part 4 are the scope reduction items that would allow the project to remain within the approved funding envelope without impacting immediate operational needs. The benefit of approving these scope reductions was to 1) maintain target funding approvals, 2) seek alternate delivery methods for items that could be procured at a lower cost, 3) eliminate items that did not provide as much of a project benefit as initially anticipated. For each item the recommendation to remove these elements from the project scope was based on the following: •Green Roof: this did not impact LEED points and was identified as a deletion that would also reduce long term maintenance costs. This option can always be brought forward as the building was constructed to accommodate this feature. •Entry Pylon Sign: this item was recommended for deferral as it can be added at any point in the future if deemed beneficial to the site. •On-site Landscaping: this work was deleted as it was possible to complete this work with in-house resources at a reduced cost. •Equipment Storage: this item was deleted as it was possible to complete this work with in-house resources, and staff was in support of allowing build out of storage needs to match operational needs. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 20 of 25 January 24, 2017 Page 6 of 10 Report No. IES17-001 •Parking Asphalt: Site conditions in the eastern zone of the lower area required time for the fill and soils to consolidate and proceeding with paving during 2015 would have put the final product at risk of premature failure. This work is not critical to current operations but will need to be addressed in the future as soils stabilize and future needs grow. Also there is an opportunity to save some costs through a combination of in-house and contracted efforts to complete the work. By approving these scope reductions, the project costs were contained to the approved project budget. Part 5 represents current additional needs related to extension of contract costs to the contractor and enhancement of the fuel dispensing system to fully leverage dispensing and monitoring features. The contract allows for recovery of administrative costs by the contractor when the duration of the contract (defined as the start date to the point of substantial completion) is beyond the contracted construction time frame. This cost has been carefully reviewed and is net of a benefitting recovery to the Town for liquidated damages associated with additional staff related administrative costs. The fuel monitoring system was not essential to the operation of the fuel dispensing system and was excluded from the initial procurement as a budget control measure. However, to take full benefit of the monitoring and control features of the fueling system, staff requested consideration of the controls component in the 2017 capital program as a separate capital project. These items result in a total net budget impact of $269,500 or 1.3 percent over the approved budget. Part 6 represents future items to complete the project based on ultimate needs. The road pylon sign, although not essential to building operations, will provide an additional means of communicating information about Town activities and operations similar to the signage at the SARC and on Yonge Street at Orchard Heights. The JOC would be a valuable location for community information messaging. Landscaping remains to be completed on the site in the yard area. This work will be completed primarily by in-house resources with some contractor support and can be completed through operating funding. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 21 of 25 January 24, 2017 Page 7 of 10 Report No. IES17-001 Asphalt paving for the east section of the lower yard was deleted from the project as part of the reported scope reduction. This area had some portions that were softer than desired for pavement and required additional time to consolidate. Asphalt paving on the lower east portion should proceed now and will be proposed as part of the 2018 capital funding request. This area is needed by operations and completion will fulfil the additional space needs for the operation. With all project considerations included, the overall budget impact is expected to be $860,000 over the approved budget, or about 4 percent. In considering the decision made during site selection for this project, even with the additional costs in site remediation and construction, there remains a net benefit in using this site over other options, both in the premium cost of a comparable marketable site (Leslie land being the only option), in the value add of improving the marginal site that was selected, and in maintaining a central location for the Town which results in long term operational efficiency related to access to Town assets. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 22 of 25 January 24, 2017 Page 8 of 10 Report No. IES17-001 Changes Cost Impact Net Change Percent Impact Project Budget 18,532,354 Contingencies (10%) 1,853,235 Total 20,385,589 Buttcon- Other Changes 425,352 Onespace Arch- Fee Increases 212,029 FF&E Sa vings (12,148) Third Party Engineering Increases 87,788 Fuelling System 127,098 Landscaping (In-House Costs to complete front)14,580 Greenhouse Floor (Part 2016 operating funding)160,470 Furniture Through Municipal Vendor Agreement (Contingency)281,110 Less: Contribution from Operating Budget (60,000) Total 1,236,279 20,487,658 - 102,069 0.50% 3. Additional Impact of Soils Issues Soils Remediation Costs 616,506 Total 616,506 21,104,164 - 718,575 3.40% 4. Approved Project Scope Reductions (Report IES15-068) Delete Green Roof (50,300) Delete entry pylon message sign allowance (60,000) Delete On-Site Landscaping (76,125) Delete Wire Cages for equipment storage (43,000) Delete parking area asphalt (489,600) Total (719,025) 20,385,139 450 0.00% 5. Current Additional Project Needs Contract Extension Administration Costs 169,500 Fuel Monitoring System (2017 Capital Program) 100,000 Total 269,500 20,654,639 - 269,050 1.30% 6. Future Project Needs (Estimates only) Road Side Pylon Sign 60,000 Landscaping 30,000 Asphalt paving and base 500,000 Total 590,000 21,244,639 - 859,050 4.04% 1. Approved Budget 2. Gross Project Cost Less Soils Issue General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 23 of 25 January 24, 2017 Page 9 of 10 Report No. IES17-001 Summary of Funding Sources for the Project The funding sources for the project are derived from the following sources: Parks Development Charges 24 percent Roads Development Charges 35 percent Sale of Lands Proceeds 41 percent Debt was also required for this project as the parks and roads DC funds are collected over many years. The current shortfall in funding from these two sources is approximately $7.2M. Interest costs in the amount of $165,260 have been incurred to the end of September 2016 at an interest rate of 1.45 percent. Interest charges for the debt are paid directly by the DC reserve accounts, as financing costs were not included in the construction budget approved by Council. Assuming annual principle and interest payments, and a rate of 2.5 percent over a 10 year amortization period, the total interest costs will be approximately $950,000 for the 10 years. With interest to date, total financing costs for the project will be approximately $1.1M, funded by development charges. Communications Considerations The information in this report summarizes and concludes the activities related to the construction of the new Joint Operations Centre and is provided as a consolidation of all project activities. Link to Strategic Plan Investing in Sustainable Infrastructure: By using new technologies and energy and environmentally conscious design and building practices. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation Not applicable. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R2 Page 24 of 25 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item R2 Page 25 of 25 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. FS17-014 Subject: Proposed Changes to Regional Property Tax Ratios Prepared by: Dan Elliott, Director of Financial Services - Treasurer Department: Financial Services Date: April 4, 2017 Recommendation 1. That Report No. FS17-014 be received; and 2. That the Town of Aurora supports revenue neutral tax ratios when the matter is considered by York Region at its Committee of the Whole meeting of April 13, 2017. Executive Summary Tax ratios represent the amount of taxation to be borne by each dollar of assessed value in each property class in relation to the residential property class. Since the introduction of Ontario’s Current Value Assessment system, York Region has tax ratio setting authority. Review of tax ratios is required each four years at each reassessment as the assessment values in each property class change at different rates depending on the local real estate economy. A couple of tax ratio options are being considered by the Region at its Committee of the Whole meeting of April 13, 2017 as follows: • Applying the existing tax ratios to the new assessments resulting in a significant tax burden shift from the non-residential property classes onto the residential property class.(status quo option) • The “revenue neutral” option seeks to adjust the tax ratios to minimize the tax burden shifts onto the residential class. • The Region’s staff report and recommendations are not final at the time of writing this Aurora report. Background Setting of tax ratios can shift tax burden from one property class onto another property class, and from one municipality to another municipality General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R3 Page 1 of 10 April 4, 2017 Page 2 of 9 Report No. FS17-014 Setting of tax ratios is highly complex in the regional context. Assessments change at different rates between classes, as well as at different rates for the same class between area municipalities. There are also multiple property classes, some with sub-classes to be considered, plus other complicating factors. However, Attachment #1 attempts to provide a numerical example of tax ratio and tax burden dynamics in a very simplified example of only one municipality with only two property classes. Property tax reassessment results in shifting of tax burden between property tax classes within the Region as a whole, between local municipalities within the Region, between properties within the same class depending on their assessment change relative to the average for that class. Ranges of Fairness for tax ratios have been established by the province The province has established Ranges of Fairness for each property class ratio as suggested targets for municipalities to consider moving towards. Outside of a reassessment, the ratios, if moved, can only be moved closer to the Range of Fairness. If the ratio becomes inside the Range of Fairness, it can only be moved around within the range, and not back outside. In response to a general reassessment, a jurisdiction may move the ratio of any property class further from the Range of Fairness, but not beyond the revenue neutrality point. If already inside the range of fairness, the ratio is permitted to be moved back outside the range of fairness, but not beyond the point of revenue neutrality. Significant tax burden shifts are possible depending on ratio decision The issue of tax ratio setting generally only comes up once every four years. In most recent years the Region has been applying revenue neutrality to retain tax burdens within property class. It has become an issue this year, as initially it appeared that the Regional staff were to be recommending using a status quo approach and allowing significant tax burden to be shifted off of the non-residential property classes and onto the residential property class. Staff have attended several staff meetings of treasurers, tax collectors and most recently, with the CAOs of the area municipalities. The data presented in this report is taken from the most recent presentation to the Area CAOs on this issue held on March 8, 2017. There are several principles to consider in setting tax ratios as follows: Fairness: the level of taxation on a property class should be related to the cost of services provided to that class of property. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R3 Page 2 of 10 April 4, 2017 Page 3 of 9 Report No. FS17-014 Equity: every dollar of assessed value should generate the same level of revenue, regardless of class. Economic Competitiveness: Setting tax ratios closer to the Ranges of Fairness reduces the relative burden on the commercial and industrial classes. Current tax ratios and ranges of fairness are set out in Table 1 below. Table 1: Residential Multi- Residential Commercial Industrial Pipeline 2016 Council- approved ratios 1.0000 1.0000 1.1172 1.3124 0.9190 Ranges of Fairness 1.0 1.0 to 1.1 0.6 to 1.1 0.6 to 1.1 0.6 to 0.7 Changes in reassessment vary across the region and across property classes. Table 2 below shows that in Aurora, residential properties increased by 41.2% in the reassessment while Commercial properties increased only 17.9%. Keeping the tax ratios the same as they are today will result in the commercial properties paying less than last year, while the residential would pay more tax in total, excluding growth factors. Table 2: Reassessment Residential Commercial Industrial Other Total Aurora 41.2% 17.9% 38.9% 29.3% 38.6% East Gwillimbury 41.8% 21.7% 11.8% 48.5% 39.9% Georgina 35.2% 21.2% 13.9% 45.8% 34.7% King 29.4% 48.2% 89.5% 38.5% 31.1% Markham 46.7% 17.9% 10.5% 20.8% 41.8% Newmarket 39.7% 27.5% 16.0% 36.5% 37.5% Richmond Hill 50.1% 20.5% 7.3% 28.1% 46.5% Vaughan 35.6% 18.9% 10.8% 39.5% 31.4% Whitchurch-Stouffville 40.9% 23.5% 13.5% 35.8% 39.0% York Region 42.2% 19.6% 12.1% 32.8% 38.3% General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R3 Page 3 of 10 April 4, 2017 Page 4 of 9 Report No. FS17-014 Analysis Tax Ratios vary significantly in the GTA Table 3 outlines the 2016 tax ratios in use across the GTA. (In Peel Region, the lower tiers set their own tax ratios as a chosen local policy.) As one can see, the Region has the lowest tax ratios for the Commercial and Industrial property classes. Of course, it is not currently known what direction the other jurisdictions will be taking for setting tax ratios for 2017. However, it seems that the tax ratios are not hurting employment growth significantly in the GTA, and accordingly may not be a significant factor in locating business and employment opportunities in the area. Table 3 2016 Multi- Res Commercial Industrial Pipeline Farm /Forest York Region 1.0 1.1172 1.3124 0.919 0.25 Durham 1.8665 1.45 2.2598 1.2294 0.2/ 0.25 Halton 2.2619 1.4565 2.3599 1.0617 0.2/0.25 Toronto 2.9044 2.9044 2.9044 1.9236 0.25 Caledon 1.6843 1.3124 1.5805 0.9239 0.1668/ 0.25 Mississauga 1.7050 1.4098 1.5708 1.1512 0.25 Brampton 1.7788 1.2971 1.4700 0.9239 0.25 Maintaining the Status Quo Tax Ratios results in large burden shift onto the Residential Class Table 4 below shows the shifts of tax burden within the classes across the region if the current tax ratios were maintained status quo. (Positive numbers are shifts into this property classes, and negatives are shifts out from this class.) General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R3 Page 4 of 10 April 4, 2017 Page 5 of 9 Report No. FS17-014 Table 4 Status Quo Option ($000s) Into (from) Res Comm Indust Other¹ Subtotal Notional Tax Rate Adjusts Total Aurora 471 (718) (157) (26) (430) 127 (557) East Gwillimbury (409) (177) (53) 13 (626) 30 (657) Georgina (209) (146) (14) (5) (373) 80 (453) King (1,609) 40 83 (4) (1,490) 69 (1,559) Markham 15,615 (5,461) (973) (266) 8,916 956 7,959 Newmarket 1,265 (431) (250) 2 586 463 124 Richmond Hill 13,592 (1,935) (512) (29) 11,117 252 10,864 Vaughan (3,031) (7,477) (3,742) (205) (14,455) 1,659 (16,114) Whitchurch‐ Stouffville 863 (237) (140) (10) 476 85 391 York Region 26,550 (16,542) (5,759) (529) 3,720 3,720 Tax burden shifts can be mitigated with Revenue Neutral Option tax ratios In contrast to the above, the following table shows the mitigation effects of the Revenue Neutral Option, which adjusts the tax ratios to minimize any shifting into or out of any class in total for the Region. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R3 Page 5 of 10 April 4, 2017 Page 6 of 9 Report No. FS17-014 Table 5 Revenue Neutral Option ($000s) Into(from) Res Comm Indust Other Subtota l Notional Tax Rate Adjusts* Total Aurora (791) (17) 60 (41) (788) 96 (884) East Gwillimbury (907) 65 12 2 (828) 23 (851) Georgina (888) 64 3 (20) (841) 60 (901) King (2,346) 193 160 (23) (2,017) 52 (2,069) Markham 8,018 178 111 (358) 7,948 722 7,226 Newmarket (201) 719 83 (27) 574 350 225 Richmond Hill 8,460 471 12 (103) 8,840 191 8,649 Vaughan (10,230) (47) 480 (248) (10,046) 1,253 (11,299) Whitchurch- Stouffville (174) 137 29 (24) (33) 64 (97) York Region 941 1,762 950 (842) 2,811 2,811 (0) A third option was considered by the Region, being to move the tax ratio’s to the outer bounds of the ranges of fairness. This action results in even greater shifts onto the Residential class than the Status Quo option and has not been discussed further in this report. Municipalities have spent many months reviewing and approving their annual budgets for 2017, each with an eye on the impact such budget would have on the tax bill of the residents. All of this has been completed on the premise of revenue neutral tax ratios being used to minimize the tax burden shifting of the reassessment of the properties. Regional staff have been concerned with the impact of increasing tax ratios on the non- residential classes to minimize the shifting onto the residential class, at the expense of having adverse effects on the economic competitiveness and attractiveness of the General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R3 Page 6 of 10 April 4, 2017 Page 7 of 9 Report No. FS17-014 Region as a place to do business. Many of the Area Treasurers and CAOs do not feel that this impact is significant, and are more particularly concerned with the adverse impacts the shift onto the Residential class will have on the overall tax satisfaction level of the voters. Detailed analysis shows that within the Residential property class, the shift is clearly more onto the higher valued properties while actually off of the below average valued properties. While the Revenue Neutral option does not fully eliminate inter-municipal shifting of tax burden, nor does it eliminate interclass shifting within all municipalities, it definitely mitigates the shifts and impacts otherwise experienced by the residential properties in all municipalities if the tax ratios were left at the status quo values. Summary: Option 1: Maintain existing ratios status quo (Table 4) • Shifts $26.5 million tax burden from non-residential onto residential Region -wide, particularly to higher valued properties in Markham and Richmond Hill • Results in significant inter-municipal shifts, particularly from Vaughan onto Markham and Richmond Hill. • Shifts $471,000 onto Aurora Residential (mainly higher valued properties, with a net shift out of Aurora of $557,000 Region of York tax burden. Option 2: Use tax ratios which are revenue neutral minimizing inter-class shifts of tax (Table 5) • Mitigates amount of inter-class shifting, only $941,000 onto residential class Region wide. • Results in optimizing maintaining tax burden in same class as it was last year to extent possible. • Mitigates degree of inter-municipal shifts, particularly from Vaughan onto Markham and Richmond Hill. • Shifts $791,000 of Regional tax burden from Aurora’s residential, with a net shift out of Aurora of $884,000 Region of York tax burden. • Moves the Region of York generally further away from the Ranges of Fairness for tax ratios as established by the Province of Ontario. Based on the above, Town staff recommend that Aurora advise the Region of York staff and council of a preference for the Revenue Neutral tax ratio option. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R3 Page 7 of 10 April 4, 2017 Page 8 of 9 Report No. FS17-014 Advisory Committee Review None Financial Implications There is no direct financial cost to the Town of Aurora in respect of the direction the Region takes on setting tax ratios for 2017. The impact is borne entirely by the property tax payers as set out in this report. Aurora’s 3.1% tax bill impact of our approved 2017 budget was premised on a revenue neutral position on tax ratios. If the Region were to choose to move to status quo tax ratios, the impacts to residents would be slightly higher overall tax bill impacts due to the shifting among classes, and the shifting among the area municipalities. For Aurora, the differences are minor, however, in Markham and Richmond Hill the differences between the two options has significant impacts on the residents’ tax bills. Communications Considerations None, the setting of tax ratios is within the Region of York’s legislated authority. Ratios are required to be set prior to the setting of final tax rates by each municipality and consequently prior to the issuance of final tax billings. Link to Strategic Plan Providing information regarding tax ratios and the impact of Region of York policy decisions on the Town of Aurora residents and businesses contributes to achieving the Strategic Plan guiding principle of “Leadership in Corporate Management” and improves transparency and accountability to the community. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. Council could choose to recommend to the Region adoption of status quo tax ratios option. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R3 Page 8 of 10 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item R3 Page 9 of 10 FS17-014 Illustrative example of the role of tax ratios in a year of reassessment Attachment #1 Year 1: Year prior to Reassessment Year 2: Year of Reassessment Residential Non-Res Residential Non-Res Reassess. Change 25%14% Assessment $800,000 200,000 New Assessment $1,000,000 228,000 Tax Ratio 1 1.1 Tax Rate 2.000000%2.200000%(res x ratio)Year 2 Option A: Status Quo Tax ratios Tax Burden $16,000 $4,400 $20,400 Assessment $1,000,000 228,000 Tax Ratio 1 1.1 Tax Rate 1.631000%1.794100%(res x ratio) Notes/Observations Tax Burden $16,310 $4,091 $20,400 Assumptions: only two property classes, no growth, and no budget increases. Year 2 Option B Change to Revenue Neutral Tax Ratios Assessment $1,000,000 228,000 Tax Ratio 1 1.20614 Tax Rate 1.600000%1.929824%(res x ratio) Tax Burden $16,000 $4,400 $20,400 Status Quo ratios results in $310 shift in burden from non-res onto residential property Year 1 demonstrates assessments, ratios, rates and burden prior to the reassessment. Year 2, both Option A and B have updated assessed values, however the reassessments for residential increased by a higher percentage than for non-res. Option A "Status Quo" demonstrates that leaving the tax ratios as they were in the prior year results in a $310 shift of tax burden from the non-res onto the residential properties. Option B "Revenue Neutral" demonstrates that tax burden shifts can be eliminated by altering the tax ratios, and setting them to the points required to maintain tax burden by class as it was in the prior year.Revenue Neutral ratios keep tax burden in same class as prior year.General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item R3 Page 10 of 10 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. FS17-015 Subject: Results of Tax Sale Held April 23, 2015 Prepared by: Paul Dillman, Manager of Revenues & Accounting, Deputy Treasurer Department: Financial Services Date: April 4, 2017 Recommendation 1.That Report No. FS17-015 be received; and 2.That the Treasurer be authorized to write-off the outstanding property tax balances as uncollectible, and vest the parcel of land, Property Roll number 1946-000-096-70000-0000, that was not sold in the Tax Sale of April 23, 2015, and that this parcel of land be offered for sale to the abutting landowners. Executive Summary To present the results of the Tax Sale that took place on April 23, 2015 and obtain approval to vest this property as set out in Part XI of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25 as amended (the “Act”) •Property arose due to conveyancing or surveying errors •Title in name of previous owner of adjacent lands •To correct situation, Town needs to vest title to its self under the Tax Sales provisions, and transfer to an adjacent owner to be combined with their lands. Background The Town may conduct Tax Sales from time to time to collect property tax arrears that have been outstanding more than three years. The process and requirements of the Tax Sale process is set out in Part XI of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25 as amended (the “Act”). Before the process can begin the property must have taxes owing relating to three prior tax years. Attachment #1 sets out a brief summary of the process, including all mandatory notices to the owners, possible owners, and parties with registered interests in the property such as mortgage holders or lien holders. Due to the specialized and strict legislative framework for a long process, the Town utilized the General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R4 Page 1 of 7 April 4, 2017 Page 2 of 4 Report No. FS17-015 services of a specialist firm to handle all documents and processes to ensure full compliance with the legislation and regulations. On April 23, 2015, the Town offered for sale three (3) properties that had property taxes outstanding. The sale was being conducted due to the owners’ lack of response to adhere to numerous notifications for payment or their failure to enter into a progressive payment plan that would retire the outstanding debt. Two of the properties advertised as included in the sale were withdrawn as the owners paid the property taxes in full prior to the sale date. No bids were received for the one remaining property. At this point, the Town may choose to vest this property to become Town owned. If vested or sold by tax sale, the tax arrears are written off, (shared with the other taxing authorities), and a clear title is registered, removing any other registered interests from the title with exceptions for certain federal and provincial interests and claims should these exist for the subject property. The property described below is an unusable small parcel which likely arose due to conveyancing or surveying errors. To correct title records it needs to be conveyed to abutting owners. It can only be conveyed to abutting owners if the Town first takes title by way of vesting. Once vested, the lands will belong to the Town clear of any tax arrears, liens and encumbrances. They may be retained, or offered for sale, including for nominal value if necessary. Failure to vest the lands will result in property taxes continuing to be levied requiring another tax sale. The success of another sale is even less likely given that the amount required to redeem these properties will increase, lessening the interest of any prospective buyer. Analysis The subject property is legally described as Roll No. 1946-000-096-70000-0000; PIN 03675-0115-(R); Part of Lot 12, Concession 2; designated as Part 3 on Reference Plan 65R9301, in the Town of Aurora (formerly the Township of Whitchurch), in the Land Registry Division of York Region (No. 65); File 12-02. It is a long rectangular parcel, approximately 12.5 meters by 221 meters, or about 2,760 square meters (29,700) square feet in size. This property is a land locked strip of land running behind 26 and 27 Offord Crescent, along the western edge of the hydro corridor easement which is upon the property to the east of the subject lands. The subject lands and those on all four sides are zoned Natural Linkage – Oak Ridges Moraine. (NL-ORM). Attachment #2 provides an Aerial Photo of the subject property. There is no value or possible use of the property for the General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R4 Page 2 of 7 April 4, 2017 Page 3 of 4 Report No. FS17-015 Town, other agencies, or other parties. It is of value to the owners of the two Offord Crescent properties, or the owner of the adjacent lands to the east. It is recommended that the Town vest the property to its self, and then offer the property to abutting landowners effectively extending their properties. It is unlikely the Town will realize much more than nominal value for this parcel of land. Advisory Committee Review None applicable Financial Implications The resale value of this land is very limited. If the Town vests this property as recommended, we must write-off the property taxes receivable totaling $94,870.99. However, we would charge tax losses applicable to the Region and Boards of Education amounting to $24,982.42, leaving the Town’s share of the taxes and interest to be $69,888.57. Provisions for such losses have been recorded in the 2016 accounts. Communications Considerations None applicable Link to Strategic Plan Providing background information to support Council in making informed decisions contributes to achieving the Strategic Plan guiding principle of “Leadership in Corporate Management” and improves transparency and accountability to the community. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation None applicable. If not vested, the taxes will continue to accrue unpaid. If vested, this land locked parcel will be of no value to the Town, and present liability risks to the Town if not transferred to adjacent property owners as extensions to their current parcels. Conclusions This property had no bids in the tax sale process, and as such may be vested to the Town and become part of its holdings. Once this process has been completed, the lands will belong to the Town clear of any tax arrears, liens and encumbrances. They General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R4 Page 3 of 7 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item R4 Page 4 of 7 Report No. FS17-015 Attachment #1 Executive Summary of the Tax Sales Process of the Municipal Act, 2001, Ontario Part XI of the Municipal Act sets out a highly prescribed process for collecting longstanding tax arrears, which if not paid in full prior, includes ultimately selling the property by a public process. Below is a summary of the process. The start of the formal process: (the start of the One Year Period) Any property which owes any taxes relating to three or more prior calendar years is eligible to be “registered for tax sale”. This involves the registering of a prescribed document on title, and giving notice of such to various prescribed parties, including those with any registered interest including finance companies. All such notices are sent by Registered Mail. Once “registered for tax sale”, a one year time clock begins counting, during which the property may be redeemed with the full payment of the then current tax balance by certified funds. No partial account payments can be accepted following Registration. If full payment is made, the property is Deregistered by registering a Cancellation Certificate on title, and providing notice of such to the various parties, again by Registered Mail. During the One Year Period: During the one year period following Registration, if not paid, a Final Notice in prescribed form must be sent to all parties again at a specified time. At any time during the period, the owner or a qualified party may request Council to adopt a bylaw to suspend the “clock” during which a staff recommended payment arrangement can be completed. Should the agreement be breached, the clock begins again on the date of breach, from where it previously was suspended. After One Year Period: At the expiry of the one year period, if not paid, the property is to be promptly advertised for sale by public auction or sealed bid tender. Specific notices and advertising must occur prior to the sale date, including advertising in the local paper. During the sale process, the Town by resolution may submit a bid to purchase any of the properties following the bid processes of the sale. Staff and Members of Council who have no Conflict of Interest in doing so, may also submit bids for the purchase of any or all of the properties. Should Council pass any resolutions in regards to the process of selling the properties, seek advice as to value or risks of a subject property purchase, or in relation to a Town submission of a bid for the purchase of any property subject to the sale, this may place members in a conflict, should they submit a bid personally. As the Town does not have ownership or property rights of the property, there is no availability of on- site or in premises inspection by the Town or interested bidders. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R4 Page 5 of 7 Report No. FS17-015 Attachment #1 Upon sale, the property is: •deeded by the municipality to the successful purchaser (municipality is never the owner) •the tax arrears are fully written-off •All registered liens and encumbrances are invalidated, with the exception of certain federal and provincial claims should they exist •Transfer deed is provided with no warranty or assurance of condition or of vacant possession: the sale is “as-is”. Removal of occupants, tenants, or previous owners is the new owner’s responsibility. Until the new deed is actually registered on title, the current owner may pay the cancellation price to redeem the property. Once registered, the new deed is final and binding. Key Fact: A significant fact must be recognized. In subsection 379(2.1), the Act states that the minimum bid or minimum tender amount shall be the cancellation price, which is the tax account balance plus process costs. Further, in subsection 379(14), the Act specifically states that in selling the property, “the Treasurer is not bound to inquire into or form any opinion of the value of the land before conducting a sale under this Part and the Treasurer is not under any duty to obtain the highest or best price for the land.” Together, these are interpreted to mean the property must be sold to the highest bid/tender amount received which exceeds the cancellation price, but this amount does not need to be market value. No Sale Situation: Where the property does not sell, the Town may write off all taxes and deed it to itself, or may write off a portion of the taxes owing and reoffer the property for tax sale by repeating the advertising and sale process, but not the entire one year process. The Town Uses a Specialist for all Details: To ensure full and complete defensible processes, the Town utilizes the services of a firm specialized in all the details, documentation, handling and communication from the beginning of the process through to the sale of the land. Our Legal Division monitors each such file and the process, and would monitor all actions through to the registration of a new deed for each property. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R4 Page 6 of 7 ~12.5m~221mHydro Co r r ido r Offord Crescent BabcockBoulevardLOCATION MAP Map created by the Town of Aurora Planning & Building Services Department, March 17, 2017. Base data provided by York Region and Aurora - GIS. Air Photos taken Spring 2016, © First Base Solutions Inc., 2016 Orthophotography. 0 50 100 MetresSUBJECT LANDS1946-000-096-70000-0000File No. 12-02 St John's Sdrd Wellington St E Vandorf SdrdHenderson Drive Wellington St W 404 404Leslie StYonge StBathurst StBayview AveBloomington Rd Attachment #2 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item R4 Page 7 of 7 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. CS17-001 Subject: Council Chambers and Holland Room Use Policy Prepared by: Techa van Leeuwen, Director, Corporate Services Department: Corporate Services Date: April 4, 2017 Recommendation 1.That Report No. CS17-001 be received; and 2.That Policy No. CORP-13 – Council Chambers and Holland Room Use, be approved; and 3.That the 2017 Fees and Charges By-law be amended to include the associated staff resourcing fee for Council Chambers and Holland Room bookings; and 4.That the attached list of Town Council Events be approved. Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to obtain Council approval on the policy outlining the appropriate use of the Council Chambers and the Holland Room. •The new Audio Visual systems in the Council Chambers and Holland Room were a significant expenditure and the system sophistication requires specialized knowledge to operate. •A policy identifying the appropriate use of the Council Chambers and the Holland Room is necessary to protect the Town’s investment. •Council Chambers will be limited to meetings of Council, General Committee, quasi-judicial bodies and other formal Town-supported events. •The Holland Room will be limited to Council Advisory Committees, internal staff meetings and public rentals at a cost recovery fee. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R5 Page 1 of 9 April 4, 2017 Page 2 of 5 Report No. CS17-001 Background On October 25, 2016, Council provided early approval of the 2017 Capital Project No. 72238 – Council Chambers Audio Visual System Upgrades and awarded the Request for Proposal to Advanced Presentation Products Inc. in the amount of $539,919. Early approval was required to allow the construction and replacement of the equipment during the Christmas holiday recess of Council. The equipment is state of the art and the system integration is sophisticated. As part of the scope of work, staff has worked with the vendor to customize the equipment programming to fit the needs of the Town. As such, the equipment is sensitive and requires a trained staff member to operate it in order to maintain its integrity. Analysis The new Audio Visual system in the Council Chambers and Holland Room was a significant expenditure and the system sophistication requires specialized knowledge to operate Staff from IT Services and Legislative Services have undergone extensive system testing and training in order to operate the many components of the audio visual system. The system includes a sophisticated touch screen interface which controls the table microphones, and audio and video outputs. There is extensive cabling throughout the Council Chambers and Holland Room, not all of which is housed in a conduit making it easily accessible for staff, but also sensitive to movement. In order to maintain the integrity of the equipment, it is recommended that trained staff are present for any meetings that require its use. A policy identifying the appropriate use of the Council Chambers and the Holland Room is necessary to protect the Town’s investment The Council Chambers and Holland Room Use Policy (“Policy”) has been developed to identify the appropriate uses of these meeting rooms. By identifying these uses and establishing a comprehensive room booking process, the risks to the equipment in these rooms is mitigated as the rooms will only be used for specific purposes, and in most instances, with trained staff present. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R5 Page 2 of 9 April 4, 2017 Page 3 of 5 Report No. CS17-001 Municipalities that have established similar policies typically restrict use of their Council Chambers to Committee and Council meetings or have a priority scale in order to determine the availability and use of their meeting rooms. Council Chambers will be available for meetings of Council, General Committee, quasi-judicial bodies and other formal Town Council-supported events In the past, the Council Chambers has mainly been used for Council and General Committee meetings, public consultations and open houses, Ontario Municipal Board hearings, and Town-officiated weddings. In 2016, the Council Chambers hosted only three (3) external events. The proposed Policy would prioritize room bookings based on the following scale: First Priority: Town Council and official Town Council events Second Priority: Public meetings by other government organizations Third Priority: Meetings of Town Boards and Advisory Committees Fourth Priority: Town-officiated Weddings Fifth Priority: Meetings called by Town departments Sixth Priority: (Holland Room only) Other Users All Council Chambers room bookings require trained staff to attend to ensure the equipment is correctly used, and to provide support in the event of a complication. Staff resources are limited and have an associated cost. In order to manage Council Chamber booking requests and the associated staff resourcing in respect to Town events, a list of proposed Town Council events will be submitted annually for Council approval. Once Council endorses this list, any further events must receive Council approval by resolution to be held in Council Chambers. The Holland Room will be limited to Council Advisory Committees, internal staff meetings and community groups at a cost recovery fee The Holland Room is the second largest meeting room in Town Hall and held eight to ten external meetings per month in 2016, including meetings for not-for-profit organizations who use the room at no cost. The Holland Room is in the process of being equipped with the same technology as the Council Chambers. It is primarily designated for use by Advisory Committees, but can be booked by internal staff, and General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R5 Page 3 of 9 April 4, 2017 Page 4 of 5 Report No. CS17-001 external groups for a fee. If an external room booking requires the use of the new technology in the Holland Room, a staff resource fee will be charged in addition to the room booking fee. Staff are working to provide an alternative meeting room for use by non-profit and charitable organizations Staff is identifying an alternative meeting room for use at no charge by non-profit and charitable organizations. It is anticipated that this space will be made available as part of a forthcoming review of the Town’s Room/Hall Booking Policy, subject to Council approval, which is projected to be completed in 2017. Advisory Committee Review N/A Financial Implications The contract to Advanced Presentation Products Inc. was awarded at a cost of $539,919. The system is sophisticated and complex and any manipulation of the system may induce system failure. Fixing and replacing equipment would be costly. IT Services and Legislative Services staff have been trained on the use of the equipment and how to troubleshoot should there be issues. Therefore, appropriate staff must be present during meetings. Staff resources are limited and do have an associated cost. The 2017 hourly rate of staff is estimated at $75. External community and user groups who are permitted to use the Holland Room will be charged for the rental and the cost of staffing (with a three (3) hour minimum charge). Communications Considerations The policy will be posted on the Town website and provided to Council Committees, staff, community groups and other agencies and boards affected by the Policy. Link to Strategic Plan If approved, the Policy would support the Strategic Plan goal of supporting an exceptional quality of life for all, through strengthening the fabric of our community by General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R5 Page 4 of 9 April 4, 2017 Page 5 of 5 Report No. CS17-001 identify new formats, methods and technologies to effectively and regularly engage the community. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. Council could not approve the Policy. 2.Council could choose to amend the proposed Policy. Conclusions The Audio Visual equipment in the Council Chambers and Holland Room was a significant investment. Pro�ecting the equipment and system integrity to ensure its longevity is a priority:and therefore staff recommends that the attached Policy placing limitations on the use of both Council Chambers and the Holland Room be approved. Attachments Attachment No. 1- Policy No. CORP-13 - Council Chambers and Holland Room Use Attachment No. 2 - Proposed list of Town Council Events Previous Reports None. Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Meeting review on March 16, 2017 Techa van Leeuwen Director Corporate Services Approved for Agenda Doug Nadorozny Chief Administrative Officer General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R5 Page 5 of 9 Topic: COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND HOLLAND ROOM USE Affects: ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, OTHER GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC REQUESTING THE USE OF THESE ROOMS Section: CORP Replaces: N/A Original Policy Date: N/A Revision Date: N/A Effective Date: APRIL 11, 2017 Proposed Revision Date: APRIL 11, 2019 Prepared By: LEGISLATIVE SERVICES Approval Authority: COUNCIL 1.0 POLICY STATEMENT The Council Chambers is designed for the conduct of formal Town business. The Council Chambers are a special part of Town Hall, reserved for the conduct of Council meetings, formal civic functions of Council and Town staff meetings. The Holland Room is designated for Town Boards and Advisory Committee use. The Council Chambers and Holland Room has been fitted with sophisticated equipment and therefore a Policy regarding the use of these rooms is required to ensure the equipment integrity. The Council Chambers and Holland Room shall be made available based on the following priority scale: First Priority: Town Council and official Town Council events Second Priority: Public meetings by other government organizations Third Priority: Meetings of Town Boards and Advisory Committees Fourth Priority: Town-officiated Weddings Fifth Priority: Meetings called by Town departments Sixth Priority: (Holland Room only) other users In the event of a conflict between this Policy and the Town of Aurora Room/Hall Booking Policy, the provisions of this Policy prevail. 2.0 PURPOSE To establish rules governing the use of the Town Hall Council Chambers and Holland Room meeting rooms. 3.0 SCOPE All Elected Officials, employees, other government organizations and members of the public requesting the use of these rooms. 4.0 DEFINITIONS Council: Council of the Town. Administrative Policies & Procedures Policy No. CORP-13 – COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND HOLLAND ROOM USE Attachment 1 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R5 Page 6 of 9 Tow n: The Corporation of the Town of Aurora. Town Boards and Advisory Committees: A Board, Ad Hoc, or Advisory Committee established by Council. Town Clerk: The staff person appointed by Council pursuant to requirements of section 228 if the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended, or his/her designate. Town Council Event: An official Town event wherein Town Council approves by Council resolution. Other government organization: Other quasi-judicial bodies such as Ontario Municipal Board, Assessment Review Board and the Coroner’s Office. Procedure By-law : the by-law that governs the calling, place and procedures of meetings of the Town, and that is enacted by Council in accordance with the requirements of subsection 238(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, as amended. 5.0 RESPONSIBILITIES Facility Booking Staff: • Receive the original booking request and seek authorization from the Town Clerk prior to booking the room; • Book the rooms if approved. IT Staff: • Provide technical support for the Council Chambers and Holland Room. Facilities Staff: • Provide room support as identified in the booking request and in the Town of Aurora Room/Hall Booking Policy. Town Clerk: • Exercise any authority delegated to the Town Clerk by this Policy; • Provide authorization for use of the Council Chambers and the Holland Room; • Administer and interpret the Policy; • Notify the relevant support staff once the room is approved for booking • Create any procedure that the Town Clerk deems necessary for the effective and efficient implementation of this Policy. Elected Officials: • Approve this Policy; • Decide on any matter referred by the Town Clerk to Council regarding this Policy. 6.0 PROCEDURE 1. Room Booking Process • A list of all Town Council events is submitted annually for Town Council approval. Any additional Town Council event outside of the approved list requires Council approval by General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R5 Page 7 of 9 resolution, prior to the booking. • All requests for Council Chamber and Holland Room bookings are subject to the provisions of the Booking Procedures in the Town of Aurora Room/Hall Booking Policy and require two (2) weeks processing time to accommodate suitable resourcing. 2. Approval and Cancellations • All requests for the Council Chambers will be approved by the Office of the Town Clerk and all requests for the Holland Room, excluding internal staff requests that do not require staff resources, must be approved by the Office of the Town Clerk. • The Town of Aurora reserves the right to cancel any booked meeting, if there is an urgent need for Council Chambers for a higher priority use. • The Town assumes no liability for displacing such groups or forcing cancellation and is not obligated to provide alternative accommodations at other Town facilities. • Refunds will be made available in accordance with the Town of Aurora Room/Hall Booking Policy. 3. Technical Staff Support • Due to the nature of the equipment housed in the Council Chambers and Holland Room there is a requirement for technical support staff to support the rooms. • The cost for staff support service will be covered by external agencies that are renting the room. Costs are stipulated within the Fees and Charges By-Law. All bookings are subject to a minimum three (3) hour fee in additional to the rental rate. 7.0 REGULATORY REFERENCES/CODES/STANDARDS General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R5 Page 8 of 9 Attachment 2 List of 2017 Approved Town Council Events Date Event Friday, May 5, 2017 Aurora Art Show and Sale Opening Gala Reception Monday, May 29, 2017 Community Recognition Awards Ceremony General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R5 Page 9 of 9 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. CS17-006 Subject: Vacant Buildings Registry Prepared by: Mandie Crawford, Manager of Bylaw Services Department: Corporate Services Date: April 4, 2017 Recommendation 1. That Report No. CS17-006 be received; and 2. That a Vacant Buildings Registry By-law be enacted at a future Council meeting. Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of Council’s authority to enact a Vacant Buildings Registry By-Law and seek direction from Council on the options for enactment. • Vacant buildings left unoccupied for extended periods of time present concerns to business owners, residents and the Town of Aurora • The Town’s current Property Standards By-Law respecting vacant buildings is limited in scope • Property Standards By-Laws are passed under the authority of the Building Code Act and Orders to Comply may be appealed, thereby possibly delaying enforcement efforts • A Vacant Building Registry By-Law passed under the authority of the Municipal Act 2001 is not appealable and would supplement the Town’s current Property Standards By-Law • Registration requirements would include primary and secondary contact information, insurance, and inspections where required General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R6 Page 1 of 7 April 4, 2017 Page 2 of 7 Report No. CS17-006 • Buildings under construction with an active building permit would be exempt from the Vacant Building Registry By-law • Cities such as London, Hamilton and Brantford have implemented Vacant Building Registries • The Fees and Services By-law would require amendments should Council enact a Vacant Building Registry Background At the Council Meeting of Tuesday, October 11th 2016, Council resolved: “That staff be directed to prepare a vacant and derelict buildings by-law for the Town of Aurora and to present said by-law to Council for consideration” Although Aurora’s property standards by-law addresses some of the issues that vacant and derelict buildings present, other issues such as ensuring owners have the building regularly inspected and have sufficient insurance can be problematic. Over the past several years, cities such as Brantford, London and Hamilton have enacted Vacant Building Registry By-laws to ensure that staff are aware of vacant buildings and can monitor them to prevent against further deterioration. Analysis Vacant buildings left unoccupied for extended periods of time present concerns to business owners, residents and the Town of Aurora Businesses owners are concerned about vacant units that having a negative impact on their businesses due to reduced property values and increased crime. Additionally, local residents want vacant homes in their areas to have houses and yards maintained for their enjoyment and to ensure property values are not affected. The Fire Department and Police in cities such as Hamilton and Brantford have expressed concerns about the safety of unoccupied buildings as they are often a target for arson and other criminal activity Complaints about vacant homes and businesses also impact resources of by-law staff who when responding to concerns about the conditions must locate current owners and General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R6 Page 2 of 7 April 4, 2017 Page 3 of 7 Report No. CS17-006 make arrangements to inspect , which at times is challenging. Inspections may lead to Orders to Comply and further follow-up inspections. The Town’s current Property Standards By-Law respecting vacant buildings is limited in scope Although the Town’s Property Standards By-law addresses buildings left vacant for more than 90 days, it only requires property owners to shut off all non-essential services and ensure that the buildings are kept secure. There is no requirement for registering these buildings under the Property Standards By-law and staff are unaware that there may be a property standards issue until a complaint is received. Locating the owners in these instances can be difficult, often delaying remedial work or enforcement actions on unkempt or derelict buildings. Property Standards By-Laws are passed under the authority of the Ontario Building Code Act and Orders to Comply may be appealed, thereby possibly delaying enforcement efforts When a property is found to be not in compliance with the Towns Property Standards By-law, an order to comply with the by-law is issued under The Ontario Building Code Act (BCA). The appeal process delays enforcement efforts which require owners to bring the property into compliance. These delays may negatively impact adjacent property owners and contribute to further deterioration of unsafe conditions. A Vacant Building Registry passed under the authority of the Municipal Act 2001 is not appealable and would supplement the Town’s current Property Standards By-Law The Municipal Act 2001 authorizes the passing of by-laws respecting the economic, social and environmental well-being of the municipality, the health, safety and well- being of persons and the protection of properties and structures. A Vacant Building Registry By-Law would supplement the Property Standards By-law 4044-99.P, adding requirements that would ensure the vacant buildings are continually maintained. As a legislative requirement, it would not be subject to the appeal process. Registration requirements would include primary and secondary contact information, insurance, and inspections where required General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R6 Page 3 of 7 April 4, 2017 Page 4 of 7 Report No. CS17-006 Owner of buildings after 90 days of vacancy would have to: • Register vacant buildings with the Town • Ensure that their current contact information was correct • Provide secondary emergency contact information • Provide proof of insurance • Permit inspection of the building to confirm that it meets requirements under the current Property Standards By-law. • Provide inspection reports from qualified persons where necessary • Require an inspection by Town Staff and Fire Safety Officer prior to re- occupancy A fee would be charged for registering the building and would require the owners to renew annually. Owners failing to maintain or register their vacant buildings could be fined. Buildings under construction with an active building permit would be exempt from the Vacant Building Registry By-law Buildings with an active building permit that are unoccupied and under construction or being redeveloped, are already regulated and monitored and by Building Inspectors. These buildings must adhere to regulations as set out by the Ontario Building Code Act and would not be subject to the Vacant Building Registry. Cities such as London, Hamilton and Brantford have implemented Vacant Building Registries The City of London has implemented a Vacant Building Registry and together with the Fire Department monitor these buildings. Buildings that fall into disrepair are managed under their property standards by-law. The City of Brantford implemented a Vacant Property Registry By-law in early 2016 and have several buildings registered. Brantford is still in the educational phase of implementing the by-law. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R6 Page 4 of 7 April 4, 2017 Page 5 of 7 Report No. CS17-006 Hamilton has a robust Vacant Building Registry By-law with over 200 buildings registered and dedicated staff to monitor them quarterly. If by-law staff confirm a building is vacant and it is not registered, they add it to the list and begin enforcement efforts. By dedicating two by-law officers to this project, in the last year they have increased registration by 120 percent. All three cities have set fees for registering and renewals ranging in cost to cover administration of the program. Hamilton’s renewal fee includes four annual inspections. The City of Hamilton considers their program to be very successful. London and Brantford are still in the early stages of the program and could not comment as to whether their programs were successful. The Fees and Services By-law would require amendments should Council enact a Vacant Building Registry If Council enacts a Building Registry By-law, amendments to the Fee By-law would be necessary to enable implementation of the registration fee. These registration fees would fall into the range as set out by other municipal Vacant Building Registry By-laws Advisory Committee Review N/A Financial Implications Implementing a Vacant Building Registry will require a minimal amount of staff resources, offset in part by the initial registration and yearly fees. Fees for registering buildings would range between $250.00 to $450.00, dependent on the cost of the administrative process. Communications Considerations If a Vacant Building By-law is enacted by Council, a communication strategy would include all local media outlets, social media and the web site. Additionally, pamphlets would be developed to assist with education. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R6 Page 5 of 7 April 4, 2017 Page 6 of 7 Report No. CS17-006 Link to Strategic Plan A Vacant Building Registry By-law would support the Town’s vison of an innovative and sustainable community where neighbours care and businesses thrive by ensuring that vacant building are well maintained and communities and business are not plagued with derelict buildings. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation Council may consider the following options as alternatives: 1. Amend the current Property Standards By-Law, making it more robust when addressing vacant buildings. This option may require staff resources time to be effective as the Property Standards By-Law provides an option for appeal. 2. Council may choose to take no action at this time. Staff may only become aware of a vacant building if a complaint is received. Conclusions As the Property Standards By-Law 4044-99.P does not require owners of vacant buildings to register with the Town, the Town is often not aware of these buildings until the condition of the buildings generates a complaint. Responding to these complaints negatively impact staff resources as they often have to locate the owner and the enforcement for purposes of compliance is an appealable process. A Vacant Building Registry would give staff more tools to ensure that these buildings do not fall into disrepair or present a safety concern for the community and would supplement the current Property Standards By-law. Attachments None Previous Reports None General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R6 Page 6 of 7 General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Item R6 Page 7 of 7 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. FS17-006 Subject: 2018 Town of Aurora Budget Workplan Prepared by: Dan Elliott, Director of Financial Services - Treasurer Department: Financial Services Date: April 4, 2017 Recommendation 1. That Report No. FS17-006 be received; and 2. That the proposed 2018 budget workplan be approved; and 3. That Council provide direction with respect to the handling of requests for funding, assistance or services in kind received during the budget year outside of the planned special Budget Committee consultation meeting. Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to present staff’s proposed 2018 Town of Aurora budget workplan to Council for its review and approval. • A new annual special Budget Committee meeting for public input is planned, to receive suggestions on revenues, expenditures, efficiencies, new services, or requests from groups or individuals requesting financial assistance, funding and/or services in kind from the Town. • Direction is sought with respect to handling of requests from individuals or groups for financial assistance, funding and/or services in kind received during other times of the budget year. Background Requirement to formally document the Town’s annual budget workplan As a part of its normal course of business, staff undertake a review at the end of each annual budget cycle with the intent of continued improvement of the town’s budgeting and reporting framework. These reviews have indicated a need for the Town to more formally document and obtain Council’s approval of its annual budget workplan. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R7 Page 1 of 8 April 4, 2017 Page 2 of 6 Report No. FS17-006 Greater structure is required to facilitate requests for funding from external stakeholders Staff’s review of the recently completed 2017 budget exercise has also identified a requirement for greater structure in regards to the facilitation of funding requests or suggestions for budget savings/efficiencies that are received from external organizations and citizens that arise both pre and post budget approval. Analysis Formal 2018 Town of Aurora Budget Workplan has been developed Staff have formally documented the Town’s 2018 Budget Workplan. Many of the key budget process milestones found within this workplan are not new. What is new is they have now been formally captured all in a single document making it easier for Council and staff to visualize how these milestones all fit together. Some key highlights from the workplan include: • Completion of the Town’s longer term development activity forecasting • Town Key Performance Indicator (KPI) review and update • Council approval of the Town’s 2018 budget workplan • Public stakeholder consultation on the Town’s operating and capital budgets • Council direction to staff regarding 2018 operating budget parameters • 2017 ten year capital plan review and approval • 2018 capital plan approval • 2018 operating budget review and approval The detailed 2018 budget workplan can be found in Attachment #1. New Budget Process relating to external stakeholder funding requests or suggestions for budget savings As part of the 2018 budget development, the Town will schedule one public Budget Committee meeting near the end of May or early June where external stakeholders will be given an opportunity to delegate to Council any budget input that they might have. In particular, any groups and individuals seeking funding assistance, and or services in kind from the Town will be encouraged to also attend. Those requesting funding or services in kind will be required to complete an information form two weeks ahead of the scheduled meeting. All delegate forms received will be provided to Committee for its review prior to the scheduled meeting. This form’s benefit is three-fold; General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R7 Page 2 of 8 April 4, 2017 Page 3 of 6 Report No. FS17-006 i. it ensures that each delegate provides a similar level of core information to Council; ii. it allows staff to obtain an understanding as to the number of delegates which must be accommodated at the public meeting; and iii. it allows Council to obtain a general understanding of each delegate’s item for discussion prior to the scheduled meeting, including the formulation of any questions that they might have. As noted in our current Procedural By-law, no decisions will be made at the public consultation meeting. Stakeholder requests/input received at the public meeting(s) will be consolidated by staff and brought back to council with a recommendation on each under one of the following groupings: • the item be incorporated into the draft operating or capital budget • the item be presented as a budget option in the budget • the item is already included or be deferred to a future budget year • the item is not considered feasible by staff at this time Public stakeholders will be able to continue to share budget input at scheduled budget committee meetings; however, they will be unable to make any formal funding requests via this mechanism. Best efforts will be used to communicate to the community the purpose and significance of this one special Budget Committee meeting. All existing funding recipients will be contacted directly. In-Year Funding or Services in Kind Request Council previously challenged staff to develop approaches which would improve the handling of in-year funding or services in kind requests. Despite efforts to channel all funding requests to the one special meeting, in-year funding requests will still arise. Procedural By-law (No. 5920.16) Section 32a (iv) reads as follows: (iv) Delegates requesting specific financial assistance or services in-kind from General Committee or Council must submit a detailed written request to the Clerk prior to the Meeting, which will be forwarded to the appropriate department for review. A decision will not be made at the Meeting where the Delegation is heard. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R7 Page 3 of 8 April 4, 2017 Page 4 of 6 Report No. FS17-006 Staff propose the following suggestions for consideration and direction by Council for bringing improved process and control to such requests. 1. Requests for support, assistance and/or services in kind with a combined total of less than $2,000 be permitted at any other time of the budget year. For any such requests, staff would require completion of a specialized form to gather consistent and pertinent information on which a decision can be made. No decision would be made at the meeting of the delegation. Requests of less than $2,000 are likely to be funded from within approved operating funding or from Council’s operating contingency account. 2. Requests larger than $2,000 (or other threshold) be required to be reviewed with and obtain the support of two members of Council prior to being placed on an agenda other than the special budget consultation meeting. This approach allows for some vetting of the ideas or request. The support of the two members is anticipated to suggest that, in the absence of any new information, those members are supportive of the Town funding the request. Again, a special form to gather details of the request would be required, and no decision would be expected at the meeting of the delegation. Requests larger than $2,000 may require use of Town reserve funds and greater consideration for the financial impacts to the Town. 3. To protect the valuable meeting time of members of Council, staff also suggest that each financial request or variation of same be permitted to be supported by a delegation only once. The same or other parties or groups in support of the first delegation would not be permitted, even at subsequent meetings. Delegations contrary to the first would be permitted. Implementation of this option would require prompt by-law amendment prior to the public consultation meeting of Budget Committee. The implementation of any of the above options would require a clarifying amendment to the provisions of the Procedural By-law (No. 5920-16). If implementation was directed, staff will bring forward the necessary amendment in a separate report as a follow-up action. Advisory Committee Review Finance Advisory Committee, February 22, 2017 reviewed a draft of this report, however significant changes have been made based on the feedback received. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R7 Page 4 of 8 April 4, 2017 Page 5 of 6 Report No. FS17-006 Financial Implications Financial implications will be determined by outcomes of the annual budget process. There is minimal cost to the Town to hold a special consultation meeting for budget purposes. Communications Considerations A strong communications plan in regards to the development of the Town’s 2018 operating and capital budget is absolutely critical due to the new special consultation meeting. Consequently, staff will develop a clear communication strategy for the entire 2018 budget cycle. This communication strategy will utilize all communication tools available to the Town including its social media channels. One key component of this communication strategy will relate to the town’s strategy for the solicitation of budget input and/or funding requests from the town’s citizens and other external organizations. Special advertising and notices will be developed for all communication channels. Further, groups already receiving funding from the town, including the Chamber of Commerce, will be personally invited to provide budget input to Council. Link to Strategic Plan Approval of the 2018 Operating Budget provides funding support and approval for all initiatives, services and operations of the Town, all of which support and advance the Strategic Plan objectives. Overall, the budget leads to improving the quality of life of the community we serve. Alternative(s) to the Recommendation 1. Council may modify the 2018 Town of Aurora Budget Workplan as desired. 2. Council may direct the implementation of any or several of the staff proposed suggestions for handling of in-year requests for funding or services in-kind which arise from groups or individuals from time to time. The thresholds of $2,000 could be increased or lowered. As well, if considered, the number of councilors prepared to support larger requests could be increased or decreased in the direction of Council. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R7 Page 5 of 8 April 4, 2017 Page 6 of 6 Report No. FS17-006 Conclusions The formal documentation of the key milestones of the Town of Aurora's budget workplan is necessary in order to provide clarity and ensure that all participant expectations are aligned. In addition, the formalization of a process for external stakeholders to present requests for funding and other budget ideas to Council both pre and post budget approval is necessary. Staff have presented a 2018 budget workplan to Council for the Town which addresses these issues, and seeks direction with respect to controlling or limiting the number of in-year requests for funding brought forward to Council for consideration. Staff recommend that the 2018 Town of Aurora budget workplan schedule as presented be approved by Council. Attachments Attachment #1 -2018 Town of Aurora Budget Workplan Previous Reports Nil Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Team review on February 16, 2017 Director of Financial Services -Treasurer Approved for Agenda Doug Nadorozny Chief Administrative Officer General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R7 Page 6 of 8 2017/2018BudgetWorkplanTownofAurora6132027 3 101724 3 10172431 7 142128 5 121926 2 9 162330 7 142128 4 111825 1 8 152229 6 132027 3 101724 1 8 152229FinanceAdvisoryCommittee(FAC)MeetingsExecutiveLeadershipTeam(ELT)FinancialPerformanceManagementMeetingCompletionofTown'slongertermdevelopmentactivityprojectionsTownKPIreview&updateCouncilApprovalof2018BudgetWorkplan(ReporttoCouncil)Capitalclosereport#1(AsofDecember31,2016)2016FinalAudit&FinancialStatementPreparation2017Interimoperatingbudgetforecastupdate(AsofMarch31,2017)Reviewandupdateoffouryearstaffingplan(2018to2021)2016yearendfinancialperformancereportCouncilDirectiontoStaffRegardingOperatingBudgetTaxIncreaseThresholdsfor2018PublicstakeholderconsultationͲoperating&capitalitems2017Interimoperatingbudgetforecastupdate(AsofMay31,2017)2017TenYearCapitalPlan&2018DetailedCapitalPlanUpdateDecemberMilestoneJanuaryATTACHMENT#1May June July August September OctoberFebruary March AprilNovemberJul.5thto21st:TenYearCapitalPlanPublishing.SpecialGC's:Oct.14th; Oct.24:CouncilApprovalMay15thto19th:ELTinputtoVarianceexplanationswillberequired.June13th:CouncilReceiptJune12to16th:DepartmentforecastinputintoFMW.July11th:CouncilDepartmentalinputmayberequired1sttwoweeksofApril.April10to19th:DepartmentforecastinputintoFMW.May16th:GC;May23rd:CouncilFeb.21toMar.3rd:Commenceupdateofcapitalclosereport.Mar.6to17th:Departmentreview&updateperiod.GC:April18th; April25th:CouncilMay1Ͳ5:FinancetodevelopreporttoFAC.Reportwillintegratecorporateprioritiesthatwereflushedoutinfirstquarter.May10th,plusAdd'lMtgs,ifnecessary:FACtodeveloprecommendedstaffbudgetdirectiontocouncil.July11:CouncilFACReview:Feb.22ndGC:Apr.4th; Apr.11th:CouncilSchedulepublicconsultationsession(s)duringthefirsthalfofJune.RevisionDate:March21,2017General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R7 Page 7 of 8 2017/2018BudgetWorkplanTownofAurora6132027 3 101724 3 10172431 7 142128 5 121926 2 9 162330 7 142128 4 111825 1 8 152229 6 132027 3 101724 1 8 152229DecemberMilestoneJanuaryATTACHMENT#1May June July August September OctoberFebruary March AprilNovember2018/19CapitalProcessKickͲOffReport&Presentation2018Fees&ServiceChargeScheduleUpdate2018OperationalPlanUpdatesinFMW(Includesreview&updateofthe'outyears'2019,2020,2021)2017Interimoperatingbudgetforecastupdate(AsofJuly31,2017)CapitalCloseReport#2(AsofJuly31,2017)FinalOperatingBudgetMaterialforELTReviewandApproval,PlusWaterBudget(IncludingkickͲoffreport&Presentation)2018DraftOperatingBudgetBinderPackagePublishing&Distribution(Including2018WaterBudget)2017Interimoperatingbudgetforecastupdate(AsofOctober31,2017)Aug.8Ͳ25th:Departmentalreview&updateofFeeSchedules.Oct.3:GC;PublicReviewPeriod(2weeks);Oct24th:CouncilOct.10th:CouncilMeetingͲ2018CapitalKickͲoffReport&Presenation.Jan.18thtoAug.31st:OpenofFMWforDepartmentalreviewandupdateof2018Operationalplansplusthreeoutyears.Aug.21to25th:Departmentalreviewofclosedcapitalreportschedules.GC:Sept.19th; Sept.29th:CouncilNov.8to15th:DepartmentforecastinputintoFMW.Dec.5th:GC;Dec.12th:CouncilAug.8to15th:DepartmentforecastinputintoFMW.Sept.19th:GC;Sept.26th:CouncilOct.30toNov.3rd:Nov.7th:Deliveryofbinderstobudgetcommittee.RevisionDate:March21,2017General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R7 Page 8 of 8 Town of Aurora General Committee Report No. PRCS17-009 Subject: Property Use Agreement: St. Andrew’s College Soccer Fields Prepared by: John Firman, Manager of Business Support Department: Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Date: April 4, 2017 Recommendation 1. That Report No. PRCS17-009 be received; and 2. That a License Agreement for the 2017 playing season for the use of soccer fields owned by St. Andrew’s College be approved; and 3. That the Director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services be authorized to execute the 2017 License Agreement, including any and all documents and ancillary agreements required to give effect to same; and 4. That, going forward, the Director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services be authorized to renew the License Agreement on an annual basis, provided that there is no financial impact to the Town, with the Director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services being authorized to execute the necessary renewal Agreements, including any and all documents and ancillary agreements required to give effect to same. Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to ensure that there are enough Town-owned facilities to meet the full need for soccer fields by various user groups, and in particular, the Aurora Youth Soccer Club (AYSC), the Town has arranged to use third-party sports fields to supplement Town-owned facilities. Each year St. Andrew’s College (SAC) leases five of their fields to the Town for the exclusive use of the AYSC. SAC has requested that the fields be leased to the Town, and that the Town manage all scheduling of use for these fields during the term of the agreement and the AYSC, in turn, pay the full cost of the lease back to the Town. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R8 Page 1 of 4 April 4, 2017 Page 2 of 4 Report No. PRCS17-009 At its May 14, 2013 meeting, Council authorized the Director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services to renew this agreement on an ongoing annual basis, provided that there is no increase in fees, which at that time were $10,725 + HST per season. SAC has now increased the fee to $11,700 per season which now requires Council approval for the renewal. Background The purpose of this agreement is to assist the AYSC in securing additional private lands within the Town of Aurora to conduct their Youth Soccer program. In the past, the AYSC, with assistance from Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services, have enjoyed the use of the lower playing fields at SAC provided that the Town enters into a Field Use Agreement with SAC. The rationale for this request is not dissimilar to the Property Use Agreement with The Stronach Group Property Use Agreement whereby the Town will be required to indemnify SAC for liability purposes as well as setting out the rules for use of the premises. At its meeting of May 14, 2013, Council authorized the Director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services to renew this agreement on an ongoing, annual basis, provided that there is no increase in fees, which at that time were $10,725 + HST per season. As such, the Director has renewed this agreement on an annual basis. SAC has since increased the fee to $11,700 per season. Analysis Highlights of the Agreement • SAC property is licensed by the Town for use of the soccer fields; • Separately, AYSC indemnifies the Town for the use of the soccer fields through the Town’s permit process; • Typically the term is from early June to early September; • If inclement weather prevents use of the soccer fields for more than five consecutive days, then the license fee is reimbursed on a per field and per diem basis; • Termination by either party on 60 days’ notice; and • The Town supplements SAC’s maintenance of the soccer fields (e.g. lining the soccer fields and cleaning up refuse). General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R8 Page 2 of 4 April 4, 2017 Page 3 of 4 Report No. PRCS17-009 Ongoing annual renewal The renewal of the agreement is handled annually, on request, and is subject to the availability of the soccer fields from SAC. Usage dates and times will change from year- to-year, but typically falls within the period of early evenings, Monday-Friday, from early June to early September. Agreement form and content The original agreements were reviewed by Legal Services to ensure they are satisfactory, with the only changes made on an annual basis being that of the specific dates and/or times for field use. Advisory Committee Review None required. Financial Implications The Town is invoiced in two equal installments with one half payable prior to June and one half payable prior to September each year. The Town invoices AYSC for the equivalent payments and receives the funds from AYSC prior to issuing payment to SAC. Therefore, there is no financial impact to the Town. Communications Considerations No communication considerations at this time. Link to Strategic Plan The property use agreement with SAC supports the Strategic Plan goal of Supporting an Exceptional Quality of Life for all through its accomplishment in satisfying requirements in the following key objectives within this goal statement: Encouraging an active and healthy lifestyle by supporting multi-generational programming in cultural and recreational activities to encourage every age cohort to interact and share experiences. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R8 Page 3 of 4 April 4, 2017 Page 4 of 4 Report No. PRCS 17-009 Alternative(s) to the Recommendation Option 1: I Option 2: Option 3: Conclusions Council can decline entering into this agreement and leave responsibility of obtaining playing field locations to AYSC; however, this would be a significant departure from previous process and may jeopardize their playing field opportunities. Council can enter into this agreement, but decline to provide authorization to the Director for annual ongoing renewals. As directed by Council. That Council authorize the Director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services to execute the 2017 License Agreement and subsequent annual renewal agreements for so long as the fields are available. Attachments None. Previous Reports PR13-025 Property Use Agreements, May 7, 2013 Pre-submission Review Agenda Management Meeting review on March 17, 2017. Departmental Approval Allan D. DowfleY___'._:) Director, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Approved for Agenda 0�?1Jvi Doug Nadorozny n Chief Administrative Officer General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Item R8 Page 4 of 4 Notice of Motion Councillor Wendy Gaertner Date: April 4, 2017 To: Mayor and Members of Council From: Councillor Gaertner Re: Appreciating Diversity in Aurora Whereas Aurora is a community that values inclusion, acceptance and diversity; and Whereas the Town Council affirms that diversity is welcome and serves to make our community stronger; and Whereas we want to send a strong message that we reject intolerance based on race, religion, ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation; and Whereas respect and acceptance for our differences are fostered by knowledge and understanding; and Whereas the Town of Aurora has the capability to use its communication tools to provide information and foster positive conversations about our diversity; 1. Now Therefore Be It Hereby Resolved That the Town utilize communications opportunities to provide information, share knowledge and promote events that celebrate the values of inclusion, acceptance and diversity; and 2. Be It Further Resolved That the Town’s social media platforms be used to celebrate and recognize key community and global events that further LGBTQ rights, human rights, and serve to assist in the elimination of discrimination of any kind. These events include—but are not limited to—Pride Week, the Town of Aurora Multicultural Festival, International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Black History Month, Asian Heritage Month, and International Women’s Day. General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Notice of Motion (a) Page 1 of 1 Public Release March 31, 2017 Town of Aurora General Committee Meeting Agenda (Revised) Tuesday, April 4, 2017 7 p.m., Council Chambers Councillor Gaertner in the Chair 1. Approval of the Agenda Recommended: That the agenda as circulated by Legislative Services be approved. 2. Declarations of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof 3. Presentations (a) Anca Mihail, Manager, Engineering and Capital Delivery Re: Item R1 – IES17-015 – Ten-Year Capital Road Reconstruction Program (b) Dan Elliott, Director of Financial Services - Treasurer Re: Item R2 – FS17-003 – Joint Operations Centre (JOC) Project: Financial Summary Report (c) Laurie Mueller and Erin Hamilton, Sport Aurora Re: Sport Plan Progress and Report (Added Item) General Committee Meeting Agenda (Revised) Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Page 2 of 8 4. Delegations (a) Jamie Cole, Aurora King Baseball Association Re: Baseball Diamond Shortage (Added Item) 5. Consent Agenda Items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered routine or no longer require further discussion, and are enacted in one motion. The exception to this rule is that a Member may request for one or more items to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion and action. Recommended: That the following Consent Agenda Items, C1 to C5 inclusive, be approved: C1. IES17-014 – Submission of Annual Drinking Water Quality Report (Information Report dated March 21, 2017, included on agenda per Member of Council request) Recommended: 1. That Report No. IES17-014 be received for information. C2. IES17-016 – Award of Tender IES 2016-103 – Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Sewer Inspection Services Recommended: 1. That Report No. IES17-016 be received; and 2. That Tender No. IES 2016-103 for Capital Project No. 41011 – Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Sewer Inspection Services for sewer inspection services at various locations in the Town of Aurora for one (1) Year (with an option to renew for an additional two (2) one (1) year periods), be awarded to Infrastructure Intelligence Services Inc. in the amount of $134,460 excluding taxes; and General Committee Meeting Agenda (Revised) Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Page 3 of 8 3. That the Director of Infrastructure and Environmental Services be authorized to renew Tender IES 2016-103 for an additional two (2), one (1) year periods, pending an annual analysis and satisfactory performance review by the Director; and 4. That the Mayor and Town Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary Agreement, including any and all documents and ancillary agreements required to give effect to same. C3. IES17-017 – Award of Tender 2017-26-IES – For the Reconstruction of Brookland Avenue from Yonge Street to Banbury Court Recommended: 1. That Report No. IES17-017 be received; and 2. That Tender No. 2017-26-IES for the reconstruction of Brookland Avenue, from Yonge Street to Banbury Court, be awarded to MGI Construction Corp. in the amount of $1,567,450.35, excluding taxes; and 3. That the Mayor and Town Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary Agreement, including any and all documents and ancillary agreements required to give effect to same. C4. PRCS17-011 – Purchase Order Increase for Summer Camp Bussing Recommended: 1. That Report No. PRCS17-011 be received; and 2. That the option to renew the Student Transportation of Canada contract be exercised for the third and final year of the Contract ending December 31, 2017; and 3. That Purchase Order No. 957 be increased by $40,000, excluding taxes, to a total of $103,547, excluding taxes, to accommodate bussing for 2017. General Committee Meeting Agenda (Revised) Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Page 4 of 8 C5. PBS17-020 – Planning Applications Status List (Information Report dated March 21, 2017, included on agenda per Member of Council request) Recommended: 1. That Report No. PBS17-020 be received for information. 6. Consideration of Items Requiring Discussion (Regular Agenda) R1. IES17-015 – Ten-Year Capital Road Reconstruction Program Recommended: 1. That Report No. IES17-015 be received; and 2. That a service standard be approved whereby the road network be maintained at a Pavement Quality Index (PQI) score of 65 (“Fair”), on average; and 3. That the Town’s 2018 operating and ten-year capital plans for the Reconstruction and Rehabilitation (R&R) of its road network, as well as the Asset Management Plan (AMP), be updated to align with a service standard of maintaining a Pavement Quality Index (PQI) of 65 (“Fair”), on average. R2. FS17-003 – Joint Operations Centre (JOC) Project: Financial Summary Report Recommended: 1. That Report No. FS17-003 and Report No. IES17-001 (Attachment #3) be received; and 2. That the overspending of $103,027 on Capital Project No. 34217 be funded as set out in Report No. FS17-003, and that the capital project be closed; and 3. That the JOC Financial Monitoring Task Force Committee previously established by Council be disbanded; and General Committee Meeting Agenda (Revised) Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Page 5 of 8 4. That the outstanding items be referred to future capital budgets. R3. FS17-014 – Proposed Changes to Regional Property Tax Ratios Recommended: 1. That Report No. FS17-014 be received; and 2. That the Town of Aurora supports revenue neutral tax ratios when the matter is considered by York Region at its Committee of the Whole meeting of April 13, 2017. R4. FS17-015 – Results of Tax Sale Held April 23, 2015 Recommended: 1. That Report No. FS17-015 be received; and 2. That the Treasurer be authorized to write off the outstanding property tax balances as uncollectible, and vest the parcel of land, Property Roll number 1946-000-096-70000-0000, that was not sold in the Tax Sale of April 23, 2015, and that this parcel of land be offered for sale to the abutting landowners. R5. CS17-001 – Council Chambers and Holland Room Use Policy Recommended: 1. That Report No. CS17-001 be received; and 2. That Policy No. CORP-13 – Council Chambers and Holland Room Use, be approved; and 3. That the 2017 Fees and Charges By-law be amended to include the associated staff resourcing fee for Council Chambers and Holland Room bookings; and 4. That the attached list of Town Council Events be approved. General Committee Meeting Agenda (Revised) Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Page 6 of 8 R6. CS17-006 – Vacant Buildings Registry Recommended: 1. That Report No. CS17-006 be received; and 2. That a Vacant Buildings Registry By-law be enacted at a future Council meeting. R7. FS17-006 – 2018 Town of Aurora Budget Workplan Recommended: 1. That Report No. FS17-006 be received; and 2. That the proposed 2018 budget workplan be approved; and 3. That Council provide direction with respect to the handling of requests for funding, assistance or services in kind received during the budget year outside of the planned special Budget Committee consultation meeting. R8. PRCS17-009 – Property Use Agreement – St. Andrew’s College Soccer Fields Recommended: 1. That Report No. PRCS17-009 be received; and 2. That a License Agreement for the 2017 playing season for the use of soccer fields owned by St. Andrew’s College be approved; and 3. That the Director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services be authorized to execute the 2017 License Agreement, including any and all documents and ancillary agreements required to give effect to same; and 4. That, going forward, the Director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services be authorized to renew the License Agreement on an annual basis, provided that there is no financial impact to the Town, with the Director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services being authorized to execute the necessary renewal Agreements, including any and all documents and ancillary agreements required to give effect to same. General Committee Meeting Agenda (Revised) Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Page 7 of 8 R9. PRCS17-012 – Music Aurora (Added Item) Recommended: 1. That Report No. PRCS17-012 be received; and 2. That direction be provided to staff regarding funding in support of Music Aurora to be held on August 5, 2017; and 3. That the Permit fee be waived in the amount of $599. R10. Excerpt from Minutes – Central York Fire Services – Joint Council Committee (JCC) Meeting of February 7, 2017, regarding the Consolidation Study (Note: Joint Chief Administrative Officers (Newmarket & Aurora) & CYFS Fire Chief, Corporate Services Report – Financial Services 2017-05, attached for information purposes only) (Added Item) Recommended: 1. That the Excerpt from Minutes – Central York Fire Services – Joint Council Committee (JCC) Meeting of February 7, 2017, and Joint Chief Administrative Officers (Newmarket & Aurora) & CYFS Fire Chief, Corporate Services Report – Financial Services 2017-05 dated January 24, 2017, regarding the Consolidation Study, be received for information purposes; and 2. That the consolidation of Central York Fire Services (CYFS) with Richmond Hill Fire and Emergency Services (RHFES) not be pursued, as there is not a sufficient business case for CYFS at this time; and 3. That staff continue to identify, report on, and implement efficiencies through partnerships with neighbouring municipalities relative to Fire Services; and 4. That JCC provide any further direction relative to Fire Services; and 5. That Richmond Hill be so advised of the recommendations of Newmarket and Aurora Councils. General Committee Meeting Agenda (Revised) Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Page 8 of 8 7. Notices of Motion (a) Councillor Gaertner Re: Appreciating Diversity in Aurora 8. New Business 9. Closed Session 10. Adjournment Public Release March 31, 2017 Town of Aurora Additional Items to General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 7 p.m., Council Chambers • Revised General Committee Meeting Agenda Index • Presentation (c) Laurie Mueller and Erin Hamilton, Sport Aurora Re: Sport Plan Progress and Report • Delegation (a) Jamie Cole, Aurora King Baseball Association Re: Baseball Diamond Shortage • Item R9 – Report No. PRCS17-012 – Music Aurora • Item R10 – Excerpt from Minutes – Central York Fire Services – Joint Council Committee (JCC) Meeting of February 7, 2017, regarding the Consolidation Study Public Release April 4, 2017 Town of Aurora Additional Items No. 2 to General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 7 p.m., Council Chambers • Delegation (b) Jamie MacDonald, Music Aurora Re: Canada 150 Celebrations – New Summer Music Festival • Delegation (c) Javed Khan, Aurora Chamber of Commerce, and Ron Weese, Sport Aurora Re: Music Aurora Additional Items No. 2 to General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Delegation (b) Page 1 of 9 IIntroducing York Region’s newest community-based not-for-profit organization focused solely on all things Music! Additional Items No. 2 to General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Delegation (b) Page 2 of 9 Background: •Incorporated December 2016 •Executive and Board in place •Formal Constitution •Established Partnerships •Membership Based Additional Items No. 2 to General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Delegation (b) Page 3 of 9 MMandate: •Festival Management •Live Event Programming •Advocacy, Education & Recognition •Event/Musician Brokering •Digital Music Hub – Get Connected Additional Items No. 2 to General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Delegation (b) Page 4 of 9 MMusic Aurora Alignment: •Town Strategies •Arts & Culture Strategy •Music Strategy •Tourism Plan •Local Businesses & Community Groups •Economic Development Additional Items No. 2 to General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Delegation (b) Page 5 of 9 MMusic Aurora is the Proud Presenter: •Aurora Winter Blues Festival •NEW Aurora Summer Music Festival Additional Items No. 2 to General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Delegation (b) Page 6 of 9 NNew Aurora Summer Music Festival •Free event - Family & YoungGen Focused •Aligned with Aurora Canada 150 Celebrations •Part of the YRFA Canada 150 Festival Trail •Active Participation by Community Partners •Positioned as a New Arts & Cultural Event •Legacy Event for Future Benefit of Town Additional Items No. 2 to General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Delegation (b) Page 7 of 9 MMusic Aurora Ask of Town: •Support the ASMF as a Canada 150 Town Sponsored Event •Approve the ask of $16K as supported by Town Canada 150 Ad Hoc Committee •Support Town Staff offer of Communications and Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Additional Items No. 2 to General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Delegation (b) Page 8 of 9 MMusic Aurora Community Partners Additional Items No. 2 to General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017 Delegation (b) Page 9 of 9 Additional Items No. 2 to General Committee Meeting Agenda Tuesday, April 4, 2017Delegation (c) Page 1 of 1